ArticleInfection ecology & epidemiology2016
Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis by MC-PCR: evaluation of diagnostic sensitivity and specificity without gold standard.
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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and geographic distribution of Echinococcus genus in wild canids in southern Québec, Canada.PloS one · 2024Article
- Sensitive detection of specific cell-free DNA in serum samples from sheep with cystic echinococcosis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Rapid and Reliable Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis from Faeces Using Droplet Digital PCR.Acta parasitologica · 2021Article
- Bayesian Analysis of Three Methods for Diagnosis of Cystic Echinococcosis in Sheep.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Targeted Sequencing of Genomic Repeat Regions Detects Circulating Cell-free Echinococcus DNA.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Article
- Validation of PCR-based protocols for the detection ofFood and waterborne parasitology · 2019Article
- Echinococcus multilocularis Infection, Southern Ontario, Canada.Emerging infectious diseases · 2019Article
- Evaluation of an automated magnetic bead-based DNA extraction and real-time PCR in fecal samples as a pre-screening test for detection of Echinococcus multilocularis and Echinococcus canadensis in coyotes.Parasitology research · 2019Article
- Latent class models for Echinococcus multilocularis diagnosis in foxes in Switzerland in the absence of a gold standard.Parasites & vectors · 2017Article
- Support for targeted sampling of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) feces in Sweden: a method to improve the probability of finding Echinococcus multilocularis.Parasites & vectors · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.