Back

Reproducibility problem with a proposed standard method to measure disinfection efficacy

Hilgren, J.; Srikanth, M.; Brutofsky, M.; Mainquist, K.; Prew, P.; King, W.; Jones, R.; Hellickson, L.; Luedtke, J.; Restrepo, K.; Brill, F.; Quinn, P.; The Efficacy Working Group,

2022-03-15 microbiology
10.1101/2022.03.15.484496 bioRxiv
Show abstract

A collaborative study was carried out in four laboratories to determine the reproducibility of a proposed ASTM International standard method for quantitatively evaluating the efficacy of disinfectants on hard, non-porous surfaces against bacteria. The method, known as the Quantitative Method, has also been suggested as a future regulatory standard for the United States and internationally. The multi-lab study was carried out using Pseudomonas aeruginosa and an alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride antimicrobial product diluted in hard water. Results of the study showed acceptable repeatability in log10 reductions within each laboratory, but unacceptable reproducibility across laboratories despite careful analyst training and standardization of test conditions. A follow-up study ruled out analyst-to-analyst differences as the cause of the poor reproducibility. As it currently exists, the Quantitative Method is not sufficiently reproducible. Ruggedness testing to assess the sensitivity of the method to small changes in operational factors is recommended.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.