ArticleVeterinary research communications2010
Development of a novel LAMP diagnostic method for visible detection of swine Pasteurella multocida.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2010. 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- RPA-CRISPR/Cas12a-based detection ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Development of a Triplex qPCR Assay Based on the TaqMan Probe for the Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Bovine Respiratory Disease: Conventional to Culture-Independent Approaches to Studying Antimicrobial Resistance in North America.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A set of four specific primers for six regions of kmt1 gene from a species specific region was designed for developing the loop-mediated isothermal amplification diagnostic method of swine Pasteurella multocida (Pm-LAMP). After the Pm-LAMP was carried out at 63°C for 1 h, the LAMP products could be visually confirmed using fluorescent dyes as detection reagent under UV-illumination. In sensitivity, the detection limit of the Pm-LAMP was 10 cfu/mL, and was 1 log less than that of the PCR method. In specificity, the Pm-LAMP did not amplify genomic DNA of swine common respiratory pathogens. Furthermore, based on results for clinical swab samples (n = 31) using PCR detection as golden standard, relative sensitivity of the Pm-LAMP was 100%, relative specificity of the Pm-LAMP was 90.9%, and percentage of observation agreement was 93.5% (Kappa = 0.85). The Pm-LAMP method should be a useful diagnostic tool for rapid and visible detection of swine Pasteurella multocida.
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.