ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2012
Dried urine spots for detection and quantification of cytomegalovirus in newborns.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maternal and congenital human cytomegalovirus infection: laboratory testing for detection and diagnosis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Review
- Biological Fluid Microsampling for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: A Narrative Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Current developments of bioanalytical sample preparation techniques in pharmaceuticals.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2022Review
- Dried urine and salivary profiling for complete assessment of cortisol and cortisol metabolites.Journal of clinical & translational endocrinology · 2020Article
- Simultaneous Determination of Selegiline, Desmethylselegiline, R/S-methamphetamine, and R/S-amphetamine on Dried Urine Spots by LC/MS/MS: Application to a Pharmacokinetic Study in Urine.Frontiers in chemistry · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dried urine spots (DUS) have been reported to provide a simple screening tool for congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. We developed a standardized method for CMV quantification from DUS. Two applications of 20 μL urine remained within the rim of the filter paper disc and were used to determine the analytical performance of Towne CMV spiked into urine and applied on the discs. The measurable range spanned 3.7 to ≥8.0 log(10) copies/mL. The detection limit was 22 DNA copies/disc. Urine samples from congenitally infected newborns and negative controls were either diluted 1:10 or applied on filter paper at the same volume. DNA copy number from DUS correlated well with copy number from 1:10 diluted urine, although there was a trend for lower levels from DUS (0.3 log(10) difference). Our standardized method for CMV detection and quantification may facilitate CMV studies in resource-limited areas and allow for longitudinal monitoring of viral loads in treated infants.
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.