Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24670154›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2014

Comparison of serological and molecular panels for diagnosis of vector-borne diseases in dogs.

Ricardo G Maggi, Adam J Birkenheuer, Barbara C Hegarty, Julie M Bradley, Michael G Levy, Edward B Breitschwerdt

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Clinicopathological abnormalities and outcome of acuteCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Experimental Infection of Ferrets withPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Molecular detection of Spirochetes andOpen veterinary journal · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Canine Babesiosis Caused by LargeAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ricardo G MaggiVector Borne Disease Diagnostic Laboratory and the Intracellular Pathogens Research Laboratory, Center for Comparative Medicine and Translational Research, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, 1060 William Moore Dr,, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607, USA. rgmaggi@ncsu.edu.
Adam J Birkenheuer
Barbara C Hegarty
Julie M Bradley
Michael G Levy
Edward B Breitschwerdt
North Carolina State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCanine vector-borne diseases (CVBD) are caused by a diverse array of pathogens with varying biological behaviors that result in a wide spectrum of clinical presentations and laboratory abnormalities. For many reasons, the diagnosis of canine vector-borne infectious diseases can be challenging for clinicians. The aim of the present study was to compare CVBD serological and molecular testing as the two most common methodologies used for screening healthy dogs or diagnosing sick dogs in which a vector-borne disease is suspected.

methodsWe used serological (Anaplasma species, Babesia canis, Bartonella henselae, Bartonella vinsonii subspecies berkhoffii, Borrelia burgdorferi, Ehrlichia canis, and SFG Rickettsia) and molecular assays to assess for exposure to, or infection with, 10 genera of organisms that cause CVBDs (Anaplasma, Babesia, Bartonella, Borrelia, Ehrlichia, Francisella, hemotropic Mycoplasma, Neorickettsia, Rickettsia, and Dirofilaria). Paired serum and EDTA blood samples from 30 clinically healthy dogs (Group I) and from 69 sick dogs suspected of having one or more canine vector-borne diseases (Groups II-IV), were tested in parallel to establish exposure to or infection with the specific CVBDs targeted in this study.

resultsAmong all dogs tested (Groups I-IV), the molecular prevalences for individual CVBD pathogens ranged between 23.3 and 39.1%. Similarly, pathogen-specific seroprevalences ranged from 43.3% to 59.4% among healthy and sick dogs (Groups I-IV). Among these representative sample groupings, a panel combining serological and molecular assays run in parallel resulted in a 4-58% increase in the recognition of exposure to or infection with CVBD.

conclusionsWe conclude that serological and PCR assays should be used in parallel to maximize CVBD diagnosis.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacterial InfectionsDNA, BacterialDog DiseasesDogsParasitic Diseases, AnimalSerologic TestsDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID24670154
PMCPMC3972965
OpenAlexW2119399347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.