ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
Ten years of external quality assessment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA quantification.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Development of a Standardized Quality Assessment Material to Support XpertDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Phylogeny of partialHeliyon · 2020Article
- Field Suitability and Diagnostic Accuracy of the Biocentric Open Real-Time PCR Platform for Dried Blood Spot-Based HIV Viral Load Quantification in Eswatini.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2019Article
- Characteristics of olfactory ensheathing cells and microarray analysis in Tupaia belangeri (Wagner, 1841).Molecular medicine reports · 2019Article
- Performance comparison of new Veris and Xpert random access HIV-1 RNA quantification assays.Virology journal · 2018Article
- Sequence Variation in Amplification Target Genes and Standards Influences Interlaboratory Comparison of BK Virus DNA Load Measurement.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Evaluation of the RealTime HIV-1, Xpert HIV-1, and Aptima HIV-1 Quant Dx Assays in Comparison to the NucliSens EasyQ HIV-1 v2.0 Assay for Quantification of HIV-1 Viral Load.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Monitoring the quality of HIV-1 viral load testing through a proficiency testing program using dried tube specimens in resource-limited settings.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Toward standardization of BK virus monitoring: evaluation of the BK virus R-gene kit for quantification of BK viral load in urine, whole-blood, and plasma specimens.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- HIV-1 Genetic Variability and Clinical Implications.ISRN microbiology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Viral load testing is an essential parameter in guiding antiretroviral therapy for individuals infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). An external quality assessment scheme for the molecular quantification of HIV-1 RNA was introduced by the United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service for Microbiology in 2000. Specimen pairs of freeze-dried plasma were distributed to a median of 141 participants three times a year. The aim of this study was to analyze the quantification of HIV-1 RNA results between 2000 and 2010. Overall variability, measured by the standard deviations of all viral load results for each specimen, was below 0.5 log copy/ml (n = 48). When we compared assay results, the medians of the viral load by assay were within a range of 0.25 to 1.08 log copies/ml, with the lowest median values being consistently reported with the Siemens branched-chain DNA assay. The spread of participant results and, hence, differences between assay medians were greater when quantifying non-B subtypes. Laboratories were scored on the proximity of their reported log difference for the specimen pair to the median log difference reported by all laboratories. The overall level of performance with the HIV-1 RNA specimens over the past 10 years has been consistently good, with more than 90% of the participants reporting in the accepted range (median difference, ±0.5 log unit). Future distributions may result in tightening the acceptance levels of quantification and the use of more challenging specimens, including a variety of subtypes, with developments focusing on maintaining the clinical relevance and educational value of the scheme.
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.