Behavioral genetics in dogs has focused on modern breeds, which are isolated subgroups with distinctive physical and, purportedly, behavioral characteristics. We interrogated breed stereotypes by surveying owners of 18,385 purebred and mixed-breed dogs and genotyping 2155 dogs. Most behavioral traits are heritable [heritability ( h ² ) > 25%], and admixture patterns in mixed-breed dogs reveal breed propensities. Breed explains just 9% of behavioral variation in individuals. Genome-wide association analyses identify 11 loci that are significantly associated with behavior, and characteristic breed behaviors exhibit genetic complexity. Behavioral loci are not unusually differentiated in breeds, but breed propensities align, albeit weakly, with ancestral function. We propose that behaviors perceived as characteristic of modern breeds derive from thousands of years of polygenic adaptation that predates breed formation, with modern breeds distinguished primarily by aesthetic traits.

Assessment of the response to the 2014–15 Ebola outbreak indicates the need for innovations in data collection, sharing, and use to improve case detection and treatment. Here we introduce a Machine Learning pipeline for Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) prognosis prediction, which packages the best models into a mobile app to be available in clinical care settings. The pipeline was trained on a public EVD clinical dataset, from 106 patients in Sierra Leone. We used a new tool for exploratory analysis, Mirador, to identify the most informative clinical factors that correlate with EVD outcome. The small sample size and high prevalence of missing records were significant challenges. We applied multiple imputation and bootstrap sampling to address missing data and quantify overfitting. We trained several predictors over all combinations of covariates, which resulted in an ensemble of predictors, with and without viral load information, with an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 0.8 or more, after correcting for optimistic bias. We ranked the predictors by their F1-score, and those above a set threshold were compiled into a mobile app, Ebola CARE (Computational Assignment of Risk Estimates). This method demonstrates how to address small sample sizes and missing data, while creating predictive models that can be readily deployed to assist treatment in future outbreaks of EVD and other infectious diseases. By generating an ensemble of predictors instead of relying on a single model, we are able to handle situations where patient data is partially available. The prognosis app can be updated as new data become available, and we made all the computational protocols fully documented and open-sourced to encourage timely data sharing, independent validation, and development of better prediction models in outbreak response. We introduce a machine-learning framework and field-deployable app to predict outcome of Ebola patients from their initial clinical symptoms. Recent work from other authors also points out to the clinical factors that can be used to better understand patient prognosis, but there is currently no predictive model that can be deployed in the field to assist health care workers. Mobile apps for clinical diagnosis and prognosis allow using more complex models than the scoring protocols that have been traditionally favored by clinicians, such as Apgar and MTS. Furthermore, the WHO Ebola Interim Assessment Panel has recently concluded that innovative tools for data collection, reporting, and monitoring are needed for better response in future outbreaks. However, incomplete clinical data will continue to be a serious problem until more robust and standardized data collection systems are in place. Our app demonstrates how systematic data collection could lead to actionable knowledge, which in turn would trigger more and better collection, further improving the prognosis models and the app, essentially creating a virtuous cycle.

Ebola virus disease (EVD) plagues low-resource and difficult-to-access settings. Machine learning prognostic models and mHealth tools could improve the understanding and use of evidence-based care guidelines in such settings. However, data incompleteness and lack of interoperability limit model generalizability. This study harmonizes diverse datasets from the 2014-16 EVD epidemic and generates several prognostic models incorporated into the novel Ebola Care Guidelines app that provides informed access to recommended evidence-based guidelines. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to investigate survival outcomes in 470 patients admitted to five Ebola treatment units in Liberia and Sierra Leone at various timepoints during 2014-16. We generated a parsimonious model (viral load, age, temperature, bleeding, jaundice, dyspnea, dysphagia, and time-to-presentation) and several fallback models for when these variables are unavailable. All were externally validated against two independent datasets and compared to further models including expert observational wellness assessments. Models were incorporated into an app highlighting the signs/symptoms with the largest contribution to prognosis. The parsimonious model approached the predictive power of observational assessments by experienced clinicians (Area-Under-the-Curve, AUC = 0.70-0.79, accuracy = 0.64-0.74) and maintained its performance across subcohorts with different healthcare seeking behaviors. Age and viral load contributed > 5-fold the weighting of other features and including them in a minimal model had a similar AUC, albeit at the cost of specificity. Clinically guided prognostic models can recapitulate clinical expertise and be useful when such expertise is unavailable. Incorporating these models into mHealth tools may facilitate their interpretation and provide informed access to comprehensive clinical guidelines. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, US National Institutes of Health, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, International Medical Corps, UK Department for International Development, and GOAL Global.

Use of rapid tests for diagnosis of COVID-19 is now commonplace, but questions remain regarding their performance characteristics compared with those of polymerase chain reaction testing. The role ... Visual Rapid Antigen Test Performance for Delta vs. Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Variants. Use of rapid tests for diagnosis of COVID-19 is now commonplace, but questions remain regarding their perfo... Background: It is important to document the performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDTs) in detecting SARS-CoV-2 variants. Objective: To compare the performance of Ag-RDTs in detecting the Delta (B...

The performance of rapid antigen tests (Ag-RDTs) for screening asymptomatic and symptomatic persons for SARS-CoV-2 is not well established. To evaluate the performance of Ag-RDTs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 among symptomatic and asymptomatic participants. This prospective cohort study enrolled participants between October 2021 and January 2022. Participants completed Ag-RDTs and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 every 48 hours for 15 days. Participants were enrolled digitally throughout the mainland United States. They self-collected anterior nasal swabs for Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR testing. Nasal swabs for RT-PCR were shipped to a central laboratory, whereas Ag-RDTs were done at home. Of 7361 participants in the study, 5353 who were asymptomatic and negative for SARS-CoV-2 on study day 1 were eligible. In total, 154 participants had at least 1 positive RT-PCR result. The sensitivity of Ag-RDTs was measured on the basis of testing once (same-day), twice (after 48 hours), and thrice (after a total of 96 hours). The analysis was repeated for different days past index PCR positivity (DPIPPs) to approximate real-world scenarios where testing initiation may not always coincide with DPIPP 0. Results were stratified by symptom status. Among 154 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 97 were asymptomatic and 57 had symptoms at infection onset. Serial testing with Ag-RDTs twice 48 hours apart resulted in an aggregated sensitivity of 93.4% (95% CI, 90.4% to 95.9%) among symptomatic participants on DPIPPs 0 to 6. When singleton positive results were excluded, the aggregated sensitivity on DPIPPs 0 to 6 for 2-time serial testing among asymptomatic participants was lower at 62.7% (CI, 57.0% to 70.5%), but it improved to 79.0% (CI, 70.1% to 87.4%) with testing 3 times at 48-hour intervals. Participants tested every 48 hours; therefore, these data cannot support conclusions about serial testing intervals shorter than 48 hours. The performance of Ag-RDTs was optimized when asymptomatic participants tested 3 times at 48-hour intervals and when symptomatic participants tested 2 times separated by 48 hours. National Institutes of Health RADx Tech program.