Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26976887›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2016

Evaluation of Commercially Available Chikungunya Virus Immunoglobulin M Detection Assays.

Barbara W Johnson, Christin H Goodman, Kimberly Holloway, P Martinez de Salazar, Anne M Valadere, Michael A Drebot

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Performance Evaluation of VIDASDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Neurological Disease Associated with Chikungunya in Indonesia.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Barbara W JohnsonDiagnostic and Reference Laboratory, Arboviral Diseases Branch, Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Christin H GoodmanDiagnostic and Reference Laboratory, Arboviral Diseases Branch, Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Kimberly HollowayViral Zoonosis, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Canada.
P Martinez de SalazarCaribbean Public Health Agency, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.
Anne M ValadereCaribbean Public Health Agency, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.
Michael A DrebotViral Zoonosis, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, Canada.
Caribbean Public Health Agency · TTCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Commercial chikungunya virus (CHIKV)-specific IgM detection kits were evaluated at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Public Health Agency of Canada National Microbiology Laboratory, and the Caribbean Public Health Agency (CARPHA). The Euroimmun Anti-CHIKV IgM ELISA kit had ≥ 95% concordance with all three reference laboratory results. The limit of detection for low CHIK IgM+ samples, as measured by serial dilution of seven sera up to 1:12,800 ranged from 1:800 to 1:3,200. The Euroimmun IIFT kit evaluated at CDC and CARPHA performed well, but required more retesting of equivocal results. The InBios CHIKjj Detect MAC-ELISA had 100% and 98% concordance with CDC and CARPHA results, respectively, and had equal sensitivity to the CDC MAC-ELISA to 1:12,800 dilution in serially diluted samples. The Abcam Anti-CHIKV IgM ELISA had high performance at CARPHA, but at CDC, performance was inconsistent between lots. After replacement of the biotinylated IgM antibody controls with serum containing CHIKV-specific IgM and additional quality assurance/control measures, the Abcam kit was rereleased and reevaluated at CDC. The reformatted Abcam kit had 97% concordance with CDC results and limit of detection of 1:800 to 1:3,200. Two rapid tests and three other CHIKV MAC-ELISAs evaluated at CDC had low sensitivity, as the CDC CHIKV IgM in-house positive controls were below the level of detection. In conclusion, laboratories have options for CHIKV serological diagnosis using validated commercial kits.

Indexed as

Antibodies, ViralCanadaCaribbean RegionCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.Chikungunya FeverChikungunya virusEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MLimit of DetectionReagent Kits, DiagnosticReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityUnited StatesAntibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID26976887
PMCPMC4944686
OpenAlexW2302328122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.