Validation of an electronic-nose sensor array in detecting C. difficile and differentiating toxin-positive from toxin-negative stool samples
Balius, P. N.; Campbell, C.; Ikrma, M.; Nguyen, H. H.
Show abstract
Objective: To evaluate the specimen-level performance of a multichannel electronic nose (e-nose) sensor array in classifying stool specimens into relevant Clostridioides difficile categories. Design: Retrospective single-center validation study with reference to polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and C. difficile toxin testing. Participants: A convenience sample of 31 discarded stool specimens with PCR and confirmatory toxin testing. Categorized into PCR-positive (+)/toxin+, PCR+/toxin-negative (-), and PCR-. Methods: Specimens were sampled in controlled headspace by two e-nose sensor arrays in 10-minute sessions with 5-second sampling intervals. The primary endpoint was one-versus rest classification performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy) into three classes: PCR+/toxin+, PCR+/toxin-, and PCR-. Data were normalized and the region of interest was extracted for training and testing. Random forests were utilized for classification of normalized data with a test-train split at the specimen-level. Results: There were 457 unique 10-minute sampling events (147 PCR+/toxin+, 183 PCR+/toxin-, 127 PCR-). Sensors 1 and 2 captured 20,331 and 23,538 unique 5-second exposures within the region of interest, respectively. Testing data classification accuracy was 0.79 [0.78, 0.81] and 0.84 [0.83, 0.85] for Sensors 1 and 2. Sensitivity for PCR+/toxin+ exposures was 0.82 [0.79, 0.84] and 0.94 [0.92, 0.95], and specificity was 0.91[0.90, 0.93] and 0.93 [0.92, 0.94] for Sensors 1 and 2. Conclusion: An e-nose sensor array partially differentiated PCR-classified C. difficile specimen classes at the exposure level under headspace-controlled conditions. Performance was strongest for PCR+/toxin+ exposures. Findings support further prospective validation in the hospital room setting.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Analytical Assessment of Metagenomic Workflows for Pathogen Detection with NIST RM 8376 and Two Sample Matrices 94%
- Analytical Validation of a Highly Accurate and Reliable Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Urine Assay 93%
- Machine-learning based detection of adventitious microbes in T-cell therapy cultures using long read sequencing 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Self-collected Saline Gargle Samples as an Alternative to Healthcare Worker Collected Nasopharyngeal Swabs for COVID-19 Diagnosis in Outpatients 92%
- A Lipidomics-Based Method to Eliminate Negative Urine Culture in General Population 92%
- Development and validation of the Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay as a highly specific tool for determining past exposure to SARS-CoV-2 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Longitudinal and Quantitative Fecal Shedding Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, Pepper Mild Mottle Virus and CrAssphage 91%
- Measurement of Klebsiella Intestinal Colonization Density to Assess Infection Risk 90%
- Sensitive, non-invasive detection of chronic wasting disease in wild and captive white-tailed deer using fecal volatile profiling 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Quantitative PCR provides a simple and accessible method for quantitative microbiome profiling 92%
- Tracking Smell Loss to Identify Healthcare Workers with SARS-CoV-2 Infection 92%
- Feasibility of Integrating Canine Olfaction with Chemical and Microbial Profiling of Urine to Detect Lethal Prostate Cancer 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Rapid, multiplexed, whole genome and plasmid sequencing of foodborne pathogens using long-read nanopore technology 91%
- Field-deployable, rapid diagnostic testing of saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2. 91%
- A serological assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in at-home collected finger-prick dried blood spots 91%
"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.