Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22891685›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2012

The development of a GeXP-based multiplex reverse transcription-PCR assay for simultaneous detection of sixteen human respiratory virus types/subtypes.

Jin Li, Nai-Ying Mao, Chen Zhang, Meng-Jie Yang, Miao Wang, Wen-Bo Xu, Xue-Jun Ma

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Nucleic acid amplification tests on respiratory samples for the diagnosis of coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2: A Diagnostic Challenge.Measurement : journal of the International Measurement Confederation · 2021
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Performance evaluation of the Panther Fusion® respiratory tract panel.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Jin LiState Key Laboratory for Molecular Virology and Genetic Engineering, National Institute for Viral Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changbai Rd 155, Beijing, Changping District 102206, China.
Nai-Ying Mao
Chen Zhang
Meng-Jie Yang
Miao Wang
Wen-Bo Xu
Xue-Jun Ma

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting standard non-molecular diagnostic methods such as viral culture and immunofluorescent (DFA) are time-consuming, labor intensive or limited sensitivity. Several multiplex molecular assays are costly. Therefore, there is a need for the development of a rapid and sensitive diagnosis of respiratory viral pathogens.

methodsA GeXP-based multiplex RT-PCR assay (GeXP assay) was developed to detect simultaneously sixteen different respiratory virus types/subtypes. Seventeen sets of chimeric primers were used to initiate the RT-PCR, and one pair of universal primers was used for the subsequent cycles of the RT-PCR. The specificity of the GeXP assay was examined with positive controls for each virus type/subtype. The sensitivity was evaluated by performing the assay on serial ten-fold dilutions of in vitro-transcribed RNA of all RNA viruses and the plasmids containing the Adv and HBoV target sequence. GeXP assay was further evaluated using 126 clinical specimens and compared with Luminex xTAG RVP Fast assay.

resultsThe GeXP assay achieved a sensitivity of 20-200 copies for a single virus and 1000 copies when all of the 16 pre-mixed viral targets were present. Analyses of 126 clinical specimens using the GeXP assay demonstrated that GeXP assay and the RVP Fast assay were in complete agreement for 109/126 (88.51%) of the specimens. GeXP assay was more sensitive than the RVP Fast assay for the detection of HRV and PIV3, and slightly less sensitive for the detection of HMPV, Adv, RSVB and HBoV. The whole process of the GeXP assay for the detection of 12 samples was completed within 2.5 hours.

conclusionsIn conclusion, the GeXP assay is a rapid, cost-effective, sensitive, specific and high throughput method for the detection of respiratory virus infections.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDNA PrimersHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionRespiratory Tract InfectionsReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsVirologyVirus DiseasesVirusesDNA Primers

Identifiers

PMID22891685
PMCPMC3462154

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.