ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2000
Comparative evaluation of two branched-DNA human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA quantification assays with lower detection limits of 50 and 500 copies per milliliter.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intrapatient diversity and its correlation with viral setpoint in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 CRF02_A/G-IbNG infection.Journal of virology · 2002Article
- Comparative performance of three viral load assays on human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) isolates representing group M (subtypes A to G) and group O: LCx HIV RNA quantitative, AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR version 1.5, and Quantiplex HIV-1 RNA version 3.0.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2001Article
- Multicenter comparison of Roche COBAS AMPLICOR MONITOR version 1.5, Organon Teknika NucliSens QT with Extractor, and Bayer Quantiplex version 3.0 for quantification of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in plasma.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2000Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We have comparatively evaluated Quantiplex version 3.0 and version 2. 0 on 133 plasma samples and a repetitive dilution series. Version 3. 0 yielded higher human immunodeficiency virus RNA values, and the ratio of version 3.0 results to version 2.0 results decreased from 3. 47 below 1,000 copies/ml to 1.97 above 50,000 copies/ml [linear regression, log (version 3.0) = 0.915 + 0.871 x log (version 2.0); r(2) = 0.952].
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.