Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12624033›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2003

International proficiency study of a consensus L1 PCR assay for the detection and typing of human papillomavirus DNA: evaluation of accuracy and intralaboratory and interlaboratory agreement.

Janet R Kornegay, Michel Roger, Philip O Davies, Amanda P Shepard, Nayana A Guerrero, Belen Lloveras, Darren Evans, François Coutlée

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The laboratory diagnosis of genital human papillomavirus infections.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2005
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Janet R KornegayRoche Molecular Systems Inc., Alameda, California, USA.
Michel Roger
Philip O Davies
Amanda P Shepard
Nayana A Guerrero
Belen Lloveras
Darren Evans
François Coutlée
BMI Healthcare · GBGeneTrace Systems (United States) · USInstitut Català d'Oncologia · ESCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CAHôpital Notre-Dame · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The PGMY L1 consensus primer pair combined with the line blot assay allows the detection of 27 genital human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes. We conducted an intralaboratory and interlaboratory agreement study to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of PCR for HPV DNA detection and typing using the PGMY primers and typing amplicons with the line blot (PGMY-LB) assay. A test panel of 109 samples consisting of 29 HPV-negative (10 buffer controls and 19 genital samples) and 80 HPV-positive samples (60 genital samples and 20 controls with small or large amounts of HPV DNA plasmids) were tested blindly in triplicate by three laboratories. Intralaboratory agreement ranged from 86 to 98% for HPV DNA detection. PGMY-LB assay results for samples with a low copy number of HPV DNA were less reproducible. The rate of intralaboratory agreement excluding negative results for HPV typing ranged from 78 to 96%. Interlaboratory reliability for HPV DNA positivity and HPV typing was very good, with levels of agreement of >95% and kappa values of >0.87. Again, low-copy-number samples were more prone to generating discrepant results. The accuracy varied from 91 to 100% for HPV DNA positivity and from 90 to 100% for HPV typing. HPV testing can thus be accomplished reliably with PCR by using a standardized written protocol and quality-controlled reagents. The use of validated HPV DNA detection and typing assays demonstrating excellent interlaboratory agreement will allow investigators to better compare results between epidemiological studies.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Techniques and ProceduresDNA, ViralHumansPapillomaviridaePolymerase Chain ReactionQuality ControlDNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID12624033
PMCPMC150263
OpenAlexW1992906241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.