Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22764306›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2012

Development of new, broadly reactive, rapid IgG and IgM lateral flow assays for diagnosis of scrub typhus.

Saowaluk Silpasakorn, Nujorn Srisamut, Pattama Ekpo, Zhiwen Zhang, Chien-Chung Chao, Wei-Mei Ching, Yupin Suputtamongkol

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Saowaluk SilpasakornDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. aowaluk_8@yahoo.com
Nujorn Srisamut
Pattama Ekpo
Zhiwen Zhang
Chien-Chung Chao
Wei-Mei Ching
Yupin Suputtamongkol
Siriraj Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of two broadly reactive rapid immunochromatographic tests (ICTs) for detection of IgM and IgG against Orientia tsutsugamushi by using archived acute-phase serum samples from 102 patients with laboratory-confirmed scrub typhus, and from 62 archived serum samples from patients with other causes of fever as a negative control. These ICTs were constructed by using a mixture of recombinant proteins: 1) C1, a chimeric protein containing epitopes of the 56-kD antigen from Karp and TA763 strains; 2) Ktr56; and 3) Gmr56. Sensitivities of the ICTs for detection of IgM and IgG were 90.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 84.4-96.0%) and 86.3% (95% CI = 80.9-93.8%), respectively. Specificities were 85.5% (95% CI = 73.9-92.2%) and 96.8% (95% CI = 90.3-100%), respectively. Both assays were more sensitive and specific than the standard immune immunofluorescence assay for the early diagnosis of scrub typhus.

Indexed as

Base SequenceChromatography, AffinityDNA PrimersFluorescent Antibody Technique, IndirectHumansImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MPolymerase Chain ReactionScrub TyphusSensitivity and SpecificityDNA PrimersImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin M

Identifiers

PMID22764306
PMCPMC3391040
OpenAlexW2114987733

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.