Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26968153›Full record

ArticleInfection ecology & epidemiology2016

Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis by MC-PCR: evaluation of diagnostic sensitivity and specificity without gold standard.

Helene Wahlström, Arianna Comin, Mats Isaksson, Peter Deplazes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection ecology & epidemiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Validation of PCR-based protocols for the detection ofFood and waterborne parasitology · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Helene WahlströmDepartment of Disease Control and Epidemiology, National Veterinary Institute, Uppsala, Sweden; Helene.wahlstrom@sva.se.
Arianna CominDepartment of Disease Control and Epidemiology, National Veterinary Institute, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mats IsakssonDepartment of Microbiology, National Veterinary Institute, Uppsala, Sweden.
Peter DeplazesInstitute of Parasitology, Vetsuisse and Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Swedish Veterinary Agency · SEUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA semi-automated magnetic capture probe-based DNA extraction and real-time PCR method (MC-PCR), allowing for a more efficient large-scale surveillance of Echinococcus multilocularis occurrence, has been developed. The test sensitivity has previously been evaluated using the sedimentation and counting technique (SCT) as a gold standard. However, as the sensitivity of the SCT is not 1, test characteristics of the MC-PCR was also evaluated using latent class analysis, a methodology not requiring a gold standard. MATERIALS AND

methodsTest results, MC-PCR and SCT, from a previous evaluation of the MC-PCR using 177 foxes shot in the spring (n=108) and autumn 2012 (n=69) in high prevalence areas in Switzerland were used. Latent class analysis was used to estimate the test characteristics of the MC-PCR. Although it is not the primary aim of this study, estimates of the test characteristics of the SCT were also obtained. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: This study showed that the sensitivity of the MC-PCR was 0.88 [95% posterior credible interval (PCI) 0.80-0.93], which was not significantly different than the SCT, 0.83 (95% PCI 0.76-0.88), which is currently considered as the gold standard. The specificity of both tests was high, 0.98 (95% PCI 0.94-0.99) for the MC-PCR and 0.99 (95% PCI 0.99-1) for the SCT. In a previous study, using fox scats from a low prevalence area, the specificity of the MC-PCR was higher, 0.999% (95% PCI 0.997-1). One reason for the lower estimate of the specificity in this study could be that the MC-PCR detects DNA from infected but non-infectious rodents eaten by foxes. When using MC-PCR in low prevalence areas or areas free from the parasite, a positive result in the MC-PCR should be regarded as a true positive.

conclusionThe sensitivity of the MC-PCR (0.88) was comparable to the sensitivity of SCT (0.83).

Indexed as

Echinococcus multilocularislatent class analysisPCRSCTsensitivityspecificity

Identifiers

PMID26968153
PMCPMC4788769
OpenAlexW2294290253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.