Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24139675›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2013

Diagnostic performance of rectal swab versus bulk stool specimens for the detection of rotavirus and norovirus: implications for outbreak investigations.

Wences Arvelo, Aron J Hall, Alejandra Estevez, Beatriz Lopez, Nicole Gregoricus, Jan Vinjé, Jon R Gentsch, Umesh Parashar, Kim A Lindblade

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Wences ArveloInternational Emerging Infections Program, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Regional Office for Central America and Panama, Guatemala City, Guatemala. Electronic address: dwi4@cdc.gov.
Aron J Hall
Alejandra Estevez
Beatriz Lopez
Nicole Gregoricus
Jan Vinjé
Jon R Gentsch
Umesh Parashar
Kim A Lindblade
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USInstitute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama · GTUniversidad del Valle de Guatemala · GT

Funding

CGH CDC HHS U01 GH000028CGH CDC HHS UO1 GH000028-02Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn January of 2008, during the peak of the rotavirus season in Guatemala, a gastroenteritis outbreak with high mortality among infants was reported in Guatemala. Despite extensive efforts, the investigation was limited by the lack of bulk stool specimens collected, particularly from the more severely dehydrated or deceased children.

objectivesWe evaluated the diagnostic performance of rectal swab specimens compared with bulk stool for the detection of rotavirus and norovirus. STUDY

designPatients with diarrhea (≥3 loose stools in 24 h) were enrolled through an ongoing surveillance system in Guatemala. From January through March 2009, we attempted to enroll 100 patients <5 years old captured by the diarrhea surveillance, and collected paired bulk stool and rectal swabs specimens from them. Specimens were tested for norovirus using real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and for rotavirus via enzyme immunoassay.

resultsWe enrolled 102 patients with paired specimens; 91% of 100 paired specimens tested for rotavirus yielded concordant results positive for rotavirus with a negativity rate of 83%. Among 100 paired specimens tested for norovirus, 86% were concordant norovirus detection and the negativity rate was 85%. The diagnostic performance for rotavirus and norovirus detection did not differ significantly between the two specimen types.

conclusionsTesting of properly collected fecal specimens using rectal swabs may be a viable alternative to bulk stool for detection of rotavirus and norovirus, particularly during outbreaks where collection of bulk stool may be difficult.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksCaliciviridae InfectionsChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesFecesFemaleGastroenteritisGuatemalaHumansInfantMaleNorovirusRectumRotavirusRotavirus InfectionsConcordanceDiagnosisGuatemalaNorovirusRotavirusSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID24139675
PMCPMC4665977
OpenAlexW2094312120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.