ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2002
Clinical evaluation of the ZstatFlu-II test: a chemiluminescent rapid diagnostic test for influenza virus.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- ERS/ESCMID state-of-the-science statement on the role of rapid diagnostic tests for the diagnosis and management of community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections.The European respiratory journal · 2026Review
- Review
- Synthesis of novel N-acetylneuraminic acid derivatives as substrates for rapid detection of influenza virus neuraminidase.Carbohydrate research · 2012Article
- Rapid Tests for Influenza.Current infectious disease reports · 2005Article
- Evaluation of three immunoassay kits for rapid detection of influenza virus A and B.Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology · 2005Article
- Comparison of the Denka-Seiken INFLU A.B-Quick and BD Directigen Flu A+B kits with direct fluorescent-antibody staining and shell vial culture methods for rapid detection of influenza viruses.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
- The limitations of point of care testing for pandemic influenza: what clinicians and public health professionals need to know.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publiqueArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exploiting the high sensitivity of the chemiluminescence phenomenon, an accurate and sensitive point-of-care test, called the ZstatFlu-II test (ZymeTx, Inc., Oklahoma City, Okla.), was developed to detect influenza virus infections. The ZstatFlu-II test takes 20 min and requires approximately 2 min of "hands-on" time for operational steps. The ZstatFlu-II test does not distinguish between infections with influenza virus types A and B. ZstatFlu-II test results are printed on Polaroid High-Speed Detector Film, allowing test results to be archived. A prototype version of the ZstatFlu-II test was evaluated during the 2000-to-2001 flu season with 300 nasal aspirate specimens from children at a pediatric hospital. Compared to culture, the ZstatFlu-II test had 88% sensitivity and 92% specificity. The Directigen test had a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 93%. The sensitivity of the ZstatFlu-II test was significantly higher than that of the Directigen test (P < 0.0574).
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.