Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24286807›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2014

MERS coronavirus: data gaps for laboratory preparedness.

Rita de Sousa, Chantal Reusken, Marion Koopmans

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. COVID-19: Developing from an Outbreak to A Pandemic.Archives of medical research · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Status, quality and specific needs of Zika virus (ZIKV) diagnostic capacity and capability in National Reference Laboratories for arboviruses in 30 EU/EEA countries, May 2016.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Virus Pathogenesis.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2016
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rita de SousaCentre for Infectious Disease Research, Diagnostics and Screening, Division Virology, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands; The European Programme for Public Health Microbiology Training (EUPHEM), European Center for Disease Control, Stockholm, Sweden.
Chantal ReuskenCentre for Infectious Disease Research, Diagnostics and Screening, Division Virology, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands; Department of Viroscience, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marion KoopmansCentre for Infectious Disease Research, Diagnostics and Screening, Division Virology, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands; Department of Viroscience, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: marion.koopmans@rivm.nl.
Erasmus University Rotterdam · NLEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control · SENational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012, many questions remain on modes of transmission and sources of virus. In outbreak situations, especially with emerging organisms causing severe human disease, it is important to understand the full spectrum of disease, and shedding kinetics in relation to infectivity and the ability to transmit the microorganism. Laboratory response capacity during the early stages of an outbreak focuses on development of virological and immunological methods for patient diagnosis, for contact tracing, and for epidemiological studies into sources, modes of transmission, identification of risk groups, and animal reservoirs. However, optimal use of this core public health laboratory capacity requires a fundamental understanding of kinetics of viral shedding and antibody response, of assay validation and of interpretation of test outcomes. We reviewed available data from MERS-CoV case reports, and compared this with data on kinetics of shedding and immune response from published literature on other human coronaviruses (hCoVs). We identify and discuss important data gaps, and biases that limit the laboratory preparedness to this novel disease. Public health management will benefit from standardised reporting of methods used, details of test outcomes by sample type, sampling date, in relation to symptoms and risk factors, along with the currently reported demographic, clinical and epidemiological findings.

Indexed as

AnimalsCapacity BuildingCoronaviridaeCoronavirus InfectionsGlobal HealthHumansRespiratory Distress SyndromeCoronavirusLaboratory preparednessMiddle East Respiratory Syndrome CoronavirusSARS

Identifiers

PMID24286807
PMCPMC7108266
OpenAlexW2104298959

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.