ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2014
Detection and differentiation of herpes simplex viruses by use of the viper platform: advantages, limitations, and concerns.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hunting for mpox (monkeypox) mimickers: Use of the Biofire meningitis/encephalitis panel on lesion swabs to support alternative viral diagnoses.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2023Article
- Tools and Techniques for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)/COVID-19 Detection.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2021Review
- Exploring alternative swabs for use in SARS-CoV-2 detection from the oropharynx and anterior nares.Journal of virological methods · 2020Article
- Tools for the Diagnosis of Herpes Simplex Virus 1/2: Systematic Review of Studies Published Between 2012 and 2018.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Viper HSV-Q(x) assay was evaluated for the detection of herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) and HSV-2 in specimens from oral, anogenital, and other miscellaneous sites. The HSV-Q(x) assay was found to be highly sensitive and accurate; however, a gray zone may be required for specimens with values falling between 50 and 800 maximum relative fluorescence units.
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.