ReviewCurrent opinion in virology2014
Past, present, and future perspectives on the diagnosis of Roseolovirus infections.
Review in Current opinion in virology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case report: Acute HHV6B encephalitis/myelitis post CAR-T cell therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive B-cell lymphoma.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Association of Inherited Chromosomally Integrated Human Herpesvirus 6 with Neurologic Symptoms and Management after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2021Article
- RNA Sequencing of theJournal of virology · 2019Article
- Efficient identification of inherited chromosomally integrated human herpesvirus 6 using specimen pooling.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2016Article
- Laboratory and clinical aspects of human herpesvirus 6 infections.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Review
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
Abstract
Diagnosis of Roseolovirus infections mandates careful selection of patients, samples, and testing methods. We review advances in the field and highlight research priorities. Quantitative (q)PCR can accurately identify and distinguish between human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) species A and B. Whether screening of high-risk patients improves outcomes is unclear. Chromosomally integrated (ci)HHV-6 confounds test interpretation but can be ruled out with digital PCR. Reverse transcription qPCR may be a more specific and clinically applicable test for actively replicating Roseoloviruses, particularly among patients with ciHHV-6. Interpretation of Roseolovirus test results faces many challenges. However, careful application of refined and emerging diagnostic techniques will allow for increasingly accurate diagnosis of clinically significant infections and disease associations.
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.