ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2011
Performance of new enzyme-linked fluorescent assays for detection of Epstein-Barr virus specific antibodies in routine diagnostics.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The incidence of epstein-barr virus primary infection among suspected patients referred to namazi hospital of shiraz, iran.Jundishapur journal of microbiology · 2015Article
- Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection in Chinese children: a retrospective study of age-specific prevalence.PloS one · 2014Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsIndirect fluorescent antibody assays are still the gold standard for the detection of Epstein-Barr-virus-specific antibodies; however, this technique requires several manual steps and an experienced technician. This retrospective study investigated the performance of the new VIDAS(®) enzyme-linked fluorescent assays for automated qualitative detection of EBV VCA IgM, VCA/EA IgG, and EBNA IgG antibodies in routine diagnostics.
methods174 serum samples were tested first with the gold standard. In context with the clinical status, 60 samples IFA IgG/IgM positive and with clinical symptoms compatible with infectious mononucleosis, 26 samples IFA IgG/IgM negative and missing any clinical symptoms and 88 samples with varying IFA status and without any clinical information were defined. In a second step all samples were retested with the new assays.
resultsIn the overall agreement between VIDAS(®) and IFA for evaluable results, almost perfect agreement was observed (kappa = 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.86-0.97). Estimating all indeterminate VIDAS(®) results as discordant or concordant the observed kappa values were 0.71 (CI 0.63-0.79) and 0.93 (CI 0.88-0.98), respectively. With the new assays 45, 22, and 70 identical results were obtained, respectively. Western blot analysis of the discrepant samples showed a quasi similar performance of both assays.
conclusionsThe new VIDAS(®) assays can be an alternative to IFA testing especially in high-throughput laboratories. Full automation of EBV serological diagnostis by the new VIDAS assays is of major importance for routine diagnostic laboratories.
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.