ArticleJournal of virological methods2013
Evaluation of the Pan Influenza detection kit utilizing the PLEX-ID and influenza samples from the 2011 respiratory season.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective comparison of RT-PCR/ESI-MS to Prodesse ProFlu Plus and Cepheid GenXpert for the detection of Influenza A and B viruses.Journal of virological methods · 2015Article
- A case-control study evaluating RT-PCR/ESI-MS technology compared to direct fluorescent antibody and xTAG RVP PCR.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2014Article
- Improving the diagnosis of bloodstream infections: PCR coupled with mass spectrometry.BioMed research international · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A comparison study was performed between the PLEX-ID and the CDC RT-PCR method for the detection and identification of Influenza A viruses using nasopharyngeal samples (N=75) collected between January and May 2011. Overall agreement was 89.3% (67/75 kappa=0.57 95% CI 0.3-0.89). Positive percent agreement was 92.3% (60/65); negative percent agreement was 70% (7/10). H1N1 pdm09 identified: 42.6% (32/75) and 54.7% (41/75) by PLEX-ID and CDC RT-PCR, respectively. H3N2 identified: 29.3% (22/75) and 32% (24/75) of samples by PLEX-ID and CDC RT-PCR, respectively. Negatives identified: 16% (12/75) and 13.3% (10/75), by PLEX-ID and CDC RT-PCR respectively. For influenza viruses identified as H1N1 pdm09, Influenza A virus A/NEW YORK/15/2009(H1N1 pdm09) was the most prevalent genotype at 50% (16/32), followed by A/CALIFORNIA/05/2009(H1N1 pdm09) at 18.2% (6/32). Updated assay plates containing additional primers designed for H1N1 pdm09 HA and NA genes were utilized for this evaluation. Among H1N1 pdm09 samples, the HA gene was conserved in 96.9% (31/32) of samples. The NA gene was conserved in 96.9% (31/32).
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.