ArticleCanadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire2016
Effect of sample pooling and transport conditions on the clinical sensitivity of a real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for Campylobacter fetus subsp. venerealis in preputial samples from bulls.
Article in Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire, 2016. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A review of testing and assurance methods forFood and waterborne parasitology · 2021Article
- Assessment of Campylobacter fetus subsp. venerealis molecular diagnosis using clinical samples of bulls.BMC veterinary research · 2020Article
- Evaluation of long-acting oxytetracycline and a commercial monovalent vaccine for the control ofThe Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2017Article
- Application of direct polymerase chain reaction assays forCanadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis of bovine genital campylobacteriosis (BGC) presents significant challenges, as traditional methods lack sensitivity when prolonged transport of samples is required. Assays of preputial samples by means of real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) provide good sensitivity and high throughput capabilities. However, there is limited information on the acceptable duration of transport and temperature during transport of samples. In addition, the use of pooled samples has proven to be a valuable strategy for the diagnosis of other venereal diseases in cattle. The objectives of the present study were to determine the effect of sample pooling and of transport time and temperature on the clinical sensitivity of a real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay for Campylobacter fetus subsp. venerealis in preputial samples from beef bulls. Eight infected bulls and 176 virgin yearling bulls were used as the source of samples. The qPCR sensitivity was comparable for unpooled samples and pools of 5 samples, whereas sensitivity was decreased for pools of 10 samples. Sensitivity for the various pool sizes improved with repeated sampling. For shorter-term transport (2 and 48 h), sensitivity was greatest when the samples were stored at 4°C and 30°C, whereas for longer-term transport (96 h) sensitivity was greatest when the samples were stored at -20°C. The creation of pools of 5 samples is therefore a good option to decrease costs when screening bulls for BGC with the qPCR assay of direct preputial samples. Ideally the samples should be stored at 4°C and arrive at the laboratory within 48 h of collection, but when that is not possible freezing at -20°C could minimize the loss of sensitivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26733730PMC4686032W2416233740What 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.