Damage Detection Sensitivity, Specificity and Classification Data Analysis for SHM Systems Design, Verification and Validation

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
KOLAPPAN GEETHA ◽  
NITIN RAVI ◽  
NIBIR CHAKRABORTY ◽  
KISHORKUMAR UKIRDE ◽  
G.S. KAMALAKAR ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Damage Detection ◽  
Systems Design ◽  
Verification And Validation ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Design Verification ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

scholarly journals Comparison of saliva with healthcare workers- and patient-collected swabs in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in a large cohort

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitnala Sasikala ◽  
Yelamanchili Sadhana ◽  
Ketavarapu Vijayasarathy ◽  
Anand Gupta ◽  
Sarala Kumari Daram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Background A considerable amount of evidence demonstrates the potential of saliva in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Our aim was to determine the sensitivity of saliva versus swabs collected by healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients themselves to assess whether saliva detection can be offered as a cost-effective, risk-free method of SARS-CoV-2 detection. Methods This study was conducted in a hospital involving outpatients and hospitalized patients. A total of 3018 outpatients were tested. Of these, 200 qRT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were recruited for further study. In addition, 101 SARS-CoV-2-positive hospitalized patients with symptoms were also enrolled in the study. From outpatients, HCWs collected nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), saliva were obtained. From inpatients, HCWs collected swabs, patient-collected swabs, and saliva were obtained. qRT-PCR was performed to detect SARS-CoV-2 by TAQPATH assay to determine the sensitivity of saliva detection. Sensitivity, specificity and positive/negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) of detecting SARS-CoV-2 were calculated using MedCalc. Results Of 3018 outpatients (asymptomatic: 2683, symptomatic: 335) tested by qRT-PCR, 200 were positive (males: 140, females: 60; aged 37.9 ± 12.8 years; (81 asymptomatic, 119 symptomatic). Of these, saliva was positive in 128 (64%); 39 of 81 asymptomatic (47%),89 of 119 symptomatic patients (74.8%). Sensitivity of detection was 60.9% (55.4–66.3%, CI 95%), with a negative predictive value of 36%(32.9–39.2%, CI 95%).Among 101 hospitalized patients (males:65, females: 36; aged 53.48 ± 15.6 years), with HCW collected NPS as comparator, sensitivity of saliva was 56.1% (47.5–64.5, CI 95%), specificity 63.5%(50.4–75.3, CI95%) with PPV of 77.2% and NPV of 39.6% and that of self-swab was 52.3%(44–60.5%, CI95%), specificity 56.6% (42.3–70.2%, CI95%) with PPV 77.2% and NPV29.7%. Comparison of positivity with the onset of symptoms revealed highest detection in saliva on day 3 after onset of symptoms. Additionally, only saliva was positive in 13 (12.8%) hospitalized patients. Conclusion Saliva which is easier to collect than nasopharyngeal swab is a viable alternate to detect SARS-COV-2 in symptomatic patients in the early stage of onset of symptoms. Although saliva is currently not recommended for screening asymptomatic patients, optimization of collection and uniform timing of sampling might improve the sensitivity enabling its use as a screening tool at community level.

scholarly journals Combined detection of CA15-3, CEA, and SF in serum and tissue of canine mammary gland tumor patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuying Fan ◽  
Xiaoli Ren ◽  
Xuesong Liu ◽  
Dongmei Shi ◽  
Enshuang Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mammary Gland ◽  
Malignant Tumor ◽  
Reference Value ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Tumor Group ◽  
Increased Sensitivity ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
Canine Mammary Gland ◽  
Combined Detection

AbstractThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the levels and clinical diagnosis value of CA15-3, CEA, and SF in canine mammary gland tumors (CMGTs). In this study, the levels of tissues/serum CA15-3, CEA, and SF in 178 CMGT patients or healthy dogs were determined by ELISA and qRT-PCR assay. CA15-3, CEA, and SF levels of the malignant tumor group were significantly higher than that of the benign tumor group and the healthy control group. In the malignant tumor group, CA15-3 held a sensitivity of 51.8%, a specificity of 93.9%, and an accuracy of 76.8%. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CEA were 44.6%, 84.1%, and 68.1% respectively. SF held a sensitivity of 62.5%, a specificity of 85.4%, and an accuracy of 76.1%. SF showed the highest sensitivity and CA15-3 showed the highest specificity. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the combined detection of the three biomarkers in malignant tumor groups were 80.4%, 78.0%, and 80.0%, respectively, therefore combined detection increased sensitivity and accuracy but decreased specificity. In conclusion, the combined detection of serum/tissue markers CA15-3, CEA, and SF may improve the detection sensitivity of CMGTs, providing reference value for clinical application.

scholarly journals Acute Pharmacokinetic Profile of Smoked and Vaporized Cannabis in Human Blood and Oral Fluid

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 233-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tory R Spindle ◽  
Edward J Cone ◽  
Nicolas J Schlienz ◽  
John M Mitchell ◽  
George E Bigelow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Whole Blood ◽  
Oral Fluid ◽  
Cardiovascular Effects ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Profile ◽  
Healthy Adults ◽  
Detection Sensitivity ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Elisa Testing ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Currently, an unprecedented number of individuals can legally access cannabis. Vaporization is increasingly popular as a method to self-administer cannabis, partly due to perception of reduced harm compared with smoking. Few controlled laboratory studies of cannabis have used vaporization as a delivery method or evaluated the acute effects of cannabis among infrequent cannabis users. This study compared the concentrations of cannabinoids in whole blood and oral fluid after administration of smoked and vaporized cannabis in healthy adults who were infrequent users of cannabis. Seventeen healthy adults, with no past-month cannabis use, self-administered smoked or vaporized cannabis containing Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) doses of 0, 10 and 25 mg in six double-blind outpatient sessions. Whole blood and oral fluid specimens were obtained at baseline and for 8 h after cannabis administration. Cannabinoid concentrations were assessed with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS-MS) methods. Sensitivity, specificity and agreement between ELISA and LC–MS-MS results were assessed. Subjective, cognitive performance and cardiovascular effects were assessed. The highest concentrations of cannabinoids in both whole blood and oral fluid were typically observed at the first time point (+10 min) after drug administration. In blood, THC, 11-OH-THC, THCCOOH and THCCOOH-glucuronide concentrations were dose-dependent for both methods of administration, but higher following vaporization compared with smoking. THC was detected longer in oral fluid compared to blood and THCCOOH detection in oral fluid was rare and highly erratic. For whole blood, greater detection sensitivity for ELISA testing was observed in vaporized conditions. Conversely, for oral fluid, greater sensitivity was observed in smoked sessions. Blood and/or oral fluid cannabinoid concentrations were weakly to moderately correlated with pharmacodynamic outcomes. Cannabis pharmacokinetics vary by method of inhalation and biological matrix being tested. Vaporization appears to be a more efficient method of delivery compared with smoking.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document