ArticleScientific reports2016
Serological detection and analysis of anti-VP1 responses against various enteroviruses (EV) (EV-A, EV-B and EV-C) in Chinese individuals.
Article in Scientific reports, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-neutralizing Antibody Responses against VP1 in Enterovirus A, B, C and Rhinovirus A species among Infants and Children in Shanghai.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Evaluation of a rapid detection for Coxsackievirus B3 using one-step reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP).Journal of virological methods · 2017Article
- Article
- Different Antibody Response against the Coxsackievirus A16 VP1 Capsid Protein: Specific or Non-Specific.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The overall serological prevalence of EV infections based on ELISA remains unknown. In the present study, the antibody responses against VP1 of the EV-A species (enterovirus 71 (EV71), Coxsackievirus A16 (CA16), Coxsackievirus A5 (CA5) and Coxsackievirus A6 (CA6)), of the EV-B species (Coxsackievirus B3 (CB3)), and of the EV-C species (Poliovirus 1 (PV1)) were detected and analyzed by a NEIBM (novel evolved immunoglobulin-binding molecule)-based ELISA in Shanghai blood donors. The serological prevalence of anti-CB3 VP1 antibodies was demonstrated to show the highest level, with anti-PV1 VP1 antibodies at the second highest level, and anti-CA5, CA6, CA16 and EV71 VP1 antibodies at a comparatively low level. All reactions were significantly correlated at different levels, which were approximately proportional to their sequence similarities. Antibody responses against EV71 VP1 showed obvious differences with responses against other EV-A viruses. Obvious differences in antibody responses between August 2013 and May 2014 were revealed. These findings are the first to describe the detailed information of the serological prevalence of human antibody responses against the VP1 of EV-A, B and C viruses, and could be helpful for understanding of the ubiquity of EV infections and for identifying an effective approach for seroepidemiological surveillance based on ELISA.
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.