Target-level detection of respiratory pathogens against routine multiplex PCR, validation set (Sanderson et al. 2026)
Sensitivity and specificity of the sequencing workflow for each pathogen target tested by the routine PCR panel, in samples passing QC.
Overview
An explanatory profile has not yet been reviewed for this record.
Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.
2 recorded evaluations, 14 metric rows. A comparison chart has not yet been validated for these results. The table retains the individual findings and their sources.
Results
Results are available, but no reviewed comparison panel is linked in this release.
All evaluations
2 evaluations · 14 results. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.
Protocol: Target-level detection of respiratory pathogens against routine multiplex PCR, validation set (Sanderson et al. 2026) · Dataset: Validation set: 344 prospectively collected nasopharyngeal swabs (Sanderson et al. 2026)
Sorted by Recall (all PCR targets; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) (higher is better). The best value in each column is highlighted. Decimals are rounded for display; each value links to the printed value and its source.
| Tested configuration | Recall (all PCR targets; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Specificity (all PCR targets; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | False negatives (all PCR targets; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | False positives (all PCR targets; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (pathogen target: influenza A; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (pathogen target: rhinovirus/enterovirus; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (pathogen target: RSV; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (pathogen target: SARS-CoV-2; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (RNA pathogen targets excluding rhinovirus and enterovirus; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (RNA pathogen targets only (adenovirus and bacteria excluded); target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (targets detectable by study qPCR; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) | Recall (targets with study qPCR Ct < 35; target level; reference: routine multiplex PCR) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alternative post-hoc detection criterion (Sanderson et al. 2026)Evaluation | 58% (best in column) | 99.9% (best in column) | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | 70% | 61% | 75% | 83% |
| Pre-specified detection criteria (Sanderson et al. 2026)Evaluation | 51% | 99.8% | 127 | nine | 58% | 19% | 85% | 65% | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
All 14 result rows with coverage, uncertainty and sources
Filter evaluations
Applied filters: All linked evaluations
Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6.
Methods and evaluation design
Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations
Recorded evaluations
Each evaluation records what was tested and under which conditions.
Baseline coverage
Reference methods help show what a model adds beyond simple controls. We track a null control and a conventional method for each protocol.
0 of 2 active baseline roles have published Rewire measurements in this release. Measurements on a selected protocol do not establish coverage of an entire suite.
No execution recipe linked to this protocol. Recipe availability does not establish a completed evaluation.
- Author-reported evaluations
- 2
Literature evidence is not a Rewire measurement. Executed but unpublished runs and private review status are not included.
Null control
Proposed control: requires review
Select a task-valid null control after reviewing inputs and metric
Protocol-specific applicability, permitted inputs, access, split, evaluator and execution requirements need review before implementation or execution.
This is a suggested selection rule, not a validated method or a measured score.
Conventional reference
Proposed control: requires review
Select an upstream conventional reference after reviewing the full protocol
Protocol-specific applicability, permitted inputs, access, split, evaluator and execution requirements need review before implementation or execution.
This is a suggested selection rule, not a validated method or a measured score.
Protocol coverage CSV (gzip) · Model evaluation matrix (gzip) · Source table (gzip) · Release and checksums (gzip)
Coverage is derived from release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6. Source citations describe the original records; they do not validate an unreviewed baseline proposal. No results have been generated by this audit.
Run instructions
No runnable recipe has been reviewed for this protocol. Dataset access, model requirements, licences and compute requirements must be checked against its sources before execution.
Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions
Evidence
Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.
Evidence table
Inspect claims, sources and review details
Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.
One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.
0 evidence rows matching the loaded filters
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|
No evidence rows match these filters. Choose another scope or clear the search.
Sources and history
Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked
1 source record and release history
- Clinical validation of a novel metagenomic nanopore sequencing method for detecting viral respiratory pathogens: diagnostic accuracy study · Original source · medRxiv 10.64898/2026.02.06.26345651 v2, posted 2026-02-26; JATS XML
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: rna-pathogen-20261011-sanderson2026-protocol-validation
- areas
- microbes-communities
- contexts
- clinical_research
- protocol
- Each pathogen target tested by the sample's routine PCR assay is a gold-standard positive or negative; sequencing detection uses the configuration's criteria. Sensitivity = detected PCR-positive targets / PCR-positive targets; specificity = undetected PCR-negative targets / PCR-negative targets. Laboratory staff were blinded to validation results. 95% intervals are Clopper-Pearson where stated (Figure 6 legend).
- version
- medRxiv v2 Results
- source locator
- Methods 'Procedures' paragraphs 1 and 5; Results 'Validation Set: Diagnostic performance'
- limitations
- Target level, not patient level.; Only samples passing batch and internal QC (273 of 344) are scored.; Sensitivity is bounded by the PCR panel's targets; detections outside the panel are not scored.; Spectrum bias: inclusion required a pathogen detected at Ct or Cn 30 or below on the four-target assays, or FilmArray testing, with about one FilmArray-negative sample collected per eight positive samples; sensitivity and specificity are not estimates for unselected swabs.; Reads were mapped only to a curated database of the 23 PCR-panel pathogens, so the study does not measure detection of organisms outside the panel or false calls outside it.
Related records
- uses data: Validation set: 344 prospectively collected nasopharyngeal swabs (Sanderson et al. 2026)
- subject: false_positive_cause: rna-pathogen-20261011-sanderson2026-protocol-validation
- assessment: Alternative post-hoc detection criterion on the validation set (Sanderson et al. 2026)
- assessment: Pre-specified detection criteria on the validation set (Sanderson et al. 2026)
- assessed by: Select an RNA pathogen-detection workflow for diagnostic testing