Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23579811›Full record

ArticleMemorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz2013

Comparison of a modified shell vial culture procedure with conventional mouse inoculation for rabies virus isolation.

María de los Angeles Ribas Antúnez, Blanca Girón, Iraima Monsalvez, Luis Morier, Gretel Acosta, Yahisel Tejero, Yanislet Cordero, Dainelyd Piedra

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

María de los Angeles Ribas AntúnezPedro Kouri Institute, Havana, Cuba. maribas@ipk.sld.cu
Blanca Girón
Iraima Monsalvez
Luis Morier
Gretel Acosta
Yahisel Tejero
Yanislet Cordero
Dainelyd Piedra
Instituto de Medicina Tropical “Pedro Kourí” · CU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rabies is a neurotropic disease that is often lethal. The early diagnosis of rabies infection is important and requires methods that allow for the isolation of the virus from animals and humans. The present study compared a modified shell vial (MSV) procedure using 24-well tissue culture plates with the mouse inoculation test (MIT), which is considered the gold standard for rabies virus isolation. Thirty brain samples (25 positive and 5 negative by the fluorescent antibody test) obtained from different animal species at the National Institute of Hygiene Rafael Rangel in Caracas, Venezuela, were studied by the MIT and MSV assays. Nine samples (36%) were positive at 24 h, 10 (40%) were positive at 48 h and six (24%) were positive at 72 h by the MSV assay. With the MIT assay, 76% were positive at six days post inoculation and 12% were positive at 12 and 18 days post inoculation. One sample that was negative according to the MSV assay was positive with MIT on the 12th day. The MSV procedure exhibited a sensitivity of 96.2%, a specificity of 100%, a positive predictive value of 100% and a negative predictive value 80%. This procedure allowed for rapid rabies virus detection. MIT can be employed as an alternative method in laboratories without tissue culture facilities.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, ViralCatsCattleChiropteraDogsFluorescent Antibody TechniqueGoatsHumansMiceRabiesRabies virusSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsTissue Culture TechniquesAntibodies, Viral

Identifiers

PMID23579811
PMCPMC3970666
OpenAlexW2035537277

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.