ArticleFood and environmental virology2014
Semi-direct lysis of swabs and evaluation of their efficiencies to recover human noroviruses GI and GII from surfaces.
Article in Food and environmental virology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surface contamination with SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review.The Science of the total environment · 2021Pooled it
- Recovery of Infectious Human Norovirus GII.4 Sydney From FomitesFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- Comparison of Swab Sampling Methods for Norovirus Recovery on Surfaces.Food and environmental virology · 2018Article
- Sampling methods for recovery of human enteric viruses from environmental surfaces.Journal of virological methods · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enteric viruses such as noroviruses (NoVs) continue to be the cause of widespread viral outbreaks due to person-to-person transmission, contaminated food, and contaminated surfaces. In order to optimize swabbing methodology for the detection of viruses on (food) contact surfaces, three swab elution/extraction strategies were compared in part one of this study, out of which, one strategy was based on the recently launched ISO protocol (ISO/TS 15216-1) for the determination of hepatitis A virus and NoV in food using real-time RT-PCR (RT-qPCR). These three swab elution/extraction strategies were tested for the detection of GI.4 and GII.4 NoV on high-density polyethylene (HD-PE) surfaces with the use of cotton swabs. For detection of GI.4 and GII.4, the sample recovery efficiency (SRE) obtained with the direct lysis strategy (based on ISO/TS 15216-1) was significantly lower than the SRE obtained with both other strategies. The semi-direct lysis strategy was chosen to assess the SRE of two common swabs (cotton swab and polyester swab) versus the biowipe (Biomérieux, Lyon, France) on three surfaces (HD-PE, neoprene rubber (NR), and nitrile gloves (GL)). For both surfaces, HD-PE and GL, no significant differences in SREs of GI.4 and GII.4 NoVs were detected between the three different swabs. For the coarser NR, biowipes turned out to be the best option for detecting both GI.4 and GII.4 NoV.
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.