Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24327785›Full record

ArticleThe Korean journal of parasitology2013

Detection of acute toxoplasmosis in pigs using loop-mediated isothermal amplification and quantitative PCR.

Yanhua Wang, Guangxiang Wang, Delin Zhang, Hong Yin, Meng Wang

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Korean journal of parasitology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Evolution ofJournal of parasitology research · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Clinical validation of visual LAMP and qLAMP assays for the rapid detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Molecular detection and phylogenetic analyses ofVeterinary medicine and science · 2017
    Article
  8. Molecular detection ofJournal of parasitic diseases : official organ of the Indian Society for Parasitology · 2016
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

5 authors.

Yanhua WangState Key Laboratory of Veterinary Etiological Biology, Lanzhou Veterinary Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou 730046, China.
Guangxiang Wang
Delin Zhang
Hong Yin
Meng Wang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay allows rapid diagnosis of Toxoplasma gondii infection. In the present study, the LAMP assay was evaluated using blood from both naturally and experimentally infected pigs. The sensitivity of the LAMP assay was compared with that of Q-PCR. Both assays detected T. gondii in the blood of experimentally infected pigs, with 100% agreement. In infected blood samples, the parasite was detected as early as 2 days post-infection and reached a peak in 3-5 days. In 216 field serum samples, the detection rates of LAMP and Q-PCR assays were 6.9% and 7.8%, respectively. This result indicates that the sensitivity of the LAMP assay was slightly lower than that of the Q-PCR assay. However, the LAMP may be an attractive diagnostic method in conditions where sophisticated and expensive equipment is unavailable. This assay could be a powerful supplement to current diagnostic methods.

Indexed as

AnimalsAzure StainsBiological AssayBrainDNA, ProtozoanLungMiceNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesParasitemiaReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificitySwineSwine DiseasesToxoplasmaToxoplasmosis, AnimalAzure StainsDNA, Protozoanloop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP)pigQ-PCRToxoplasma gondii

Identifiers

PMID24327785
PMCPMC3857507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.