Speed of Rapid Serial Visual Presentation of Pictures, Numbers and Words Affects Event-Related Potential-Based Detection Accuracy.

Rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) based brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can detect target images among a continuous stream of rapidly presented images, by classifying a viewer's event related potentials (ERPs) associated with the target and non-targets images. Whilst the majority of RSVP-BCI studies to date have concentrated on the identification of a single type of image, namely pictures, here we study the capability of RSVP-BCI to detect three different target image types: pictures, numbers and words. The impact of presentation duration (speed) i.e., 100-200ms (5-10Hz), 200-300ms (3.3-5Hz) or 300-400ms (2.5-3.3Hz), is also investigated. 2-way repeated measure ANOVA on accuracies of detecting targets from non-target stimuli (ratio 1:9) measured via area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC) for N=15 subjects revealed a significant effect of factor Stimulus-Type (pictures, numbers, words) (F (2,28) = 7.243, p = 0.003 ) and for Stimulus-Duration (F (2,28) = 5.591, p = 0.011). Furthermore, there is an interaction between stimulus type and duration: F (4,56) = 4.419, p = 0.004 ). The results indicate that when designing RSVP-BCI paradigms, the content of the images and the rate at which images are presented impact on the accuracy of detection and hence these parameters are key experimental variables in protocol design and applications, which apply RSVP for multimodal image datasets.

Evaluation of the Biofire FilmArray BioThreat-E Test (v2.5) for Rapid Identification of Ebola Virus Disease in Heat-Treated Blood Samples Obtained in Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom.

Rapid Ebola virus (EBOV) detection is crucial for appropriate patient management and care. The performance of the FilmArray BioThreat-E test (v2.5) using whole-blood samples was evaluated in Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom and was compared with results generated by a real-time Ebola Zaire PCR reference method. Samples were tested in diagnostic laboratories upon availability, included successive samples from individual patients, and were heat treated to facilitate EBOV inactivation prior to PCR. The BioThreat-E test had a sensitivity of 84% (confidence interval [CI], 64% to 95%) and a specificity of 89% (CI, 73% to 97%) in Sierra Leone (n = 60; 44 patients) and a sensitivity of 75% (CI, 19% to 99%) and a specificity of 100% (CI, 97% to 100%) in the United Kingdom (n = 108; 70 patients) compared to the reference real-time PCR. Statistical analysis (Fisher's exact test) indicated there was no significant difference between the methods at the 99% confidence level in either country. In 9 discrepant results (5 real-time PCR positives and BioThreat-E test negatives and 4 real-time PCR negatives and BioThreat-E test positives), the majority (n = 8) were obtained from samples with an observed or probable low viral load. The FilmArray BioThreat-E test (v2.5) therefore provides an attractive option for laboratories (either in austere field settings or in countries with an advanced technological infrastructure) which do not routinely offer an EBOV diagnostic capability.