Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22231499›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2012

Immuno-PCR for the early serological diagnosis of acute infectious diseases: the Q fever paradigm.

N Malou, A Renvoise, C Nappez, D Raoult

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Immunoproteomics: The Evolution from Classical Methods to Emerging Techniques.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N MalouUnité de Recherche sur les Maladies Infectieuses et Tropicales Emergentes, UMR CNRS 6236/IRD 198, Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille, France.
A Renvoise
C Nappez
D Raoult
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To reduce the delay in diagnosis of Q fever, we have adapted the ultrasensitive immuno-PCR method for the detection of Phase II IgM anti-Coxiella burnetii. We compared its performance to ELISA, IFA and PCR using 31 acute Q fever sera and 50 control sera. The best sensitivity was obtained by iPCR (27 out of 31) followed by PCR (18 out of 31), ELISA (12 out of 31) and IFA (10 out of 31). A specificity of 92% was found by iPCR (3 false positive out of 40), 92% for ELISA (3 false positive out of 40) whereas PCR and IFA exhibited a specificity of 100%. Among the 31 Q fever sera, we compared the four methods for the detection of the early sera sampled during the two first weeks after the onset of symptoms and found a sensitivity of 90% by iPCR, 55% for PCR, 35% for ELISA and 25% for IFA. The results presented in this study suggest that iPCR is a promising, sensitive and specific method that can be used for the early diagnosis of acute Q fever and more generally for acute infections where traditional methods lack sensitivity.

Indexed as

Antibodies, BacterialClinical Laboratory TechniquesHumansImmunoassayImmunoglobulin MPolymerase Chain ReactionQ FeverSensitivity and SpecificitySerologic TestsAntibodies, BacterialImmunoglobulin M

Identifiers

PMID22231499
OpenAlexW2050713786

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.