ArticleJournal of virological methods2016
Evaluation of two singleplex reverse transcription-Insulated isothermal PCR tests and a duplex real-time RT-PCR test for the detection of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus and porcine deltacoronavirus.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- The structure and function of membrane protein in coronavirus infection and its applications in the development of vaccines and therapeutic drugs.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Recovering wastewater RNA for virome sequencing by systematically optimized tangential-flow ultrafiltration and Nanotrap microbiome particles.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Advancements in Modern Nucleic Acid-Based Multiplex Testing Methodologies for the Diagnosis of Swine Infectious Diseases.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
- Advances in porcine epidemic diarrhea virus research: genome, epidemiology, vaccines, and detection methods.Discover nano · 2025Review
- Development of a Multiplex Quantitative PCR for Detecting Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus, Transmissible Gastroenteritis Virus, and Porcine Deltacoronavirus Simultaneously in China.Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Genomic and Virulence Investigations of a Novel Porcine Deltacoronavirus Strain Identified in South Korea.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2023Article
- Current State of Molecular and Serological Methods for Detection of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Development and Clinical Applications of a 5-Plex Real-Time RT-PCR for Swine Enteric Coronaviruses.Viruses · 2022Article
- Article
- Development of a multiplex RT-PCR method for the detection of four porcine enteric coronaviruses.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- A Novel, Cleaved Probe-Based Reverse Transcription Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Method for Specific and Sensitive Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Development of a Novel Double Antibody Sandwich ELISA for Quantitative Detection of Porcine Deltacoronavirus Antigen.Viruses · 2021Article
- Porcine enteric coronaviruses: an updated overview of the pathogenesis, prevalence, and diagnosis.Veterinary research communications · 2021Review
- Use of dual priming oligonucleotide system-based multiplex RT-PCR assay to detect five diarrhea viruses in pig herds in South China.AMB Express · 2021Article
- Data standardization implementation and applications within and among diagnostic laboratories: integrating and monitoring enteric coronaviruses.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2021Article
- Rapid and efficient detection methods of pathogenic swine enteric coronaviruses.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Rapid and visual detection of porcine deltacoronavirus by recombinase polymerase amplification combined with a lateral flow dipstick.BMC veterinary research · 2020Article
- Rapid identification of melioidosis agent by an insulated isothermal PCR on a field-deployable device.PeerJ · 2020Article
- A TaqMan-probe-based multiplex real-time RT-qPCR for simultaneous detection of porcine enteric coronaviruses.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2019Article
- Development and evaluation of a real-time RT-PCR and a field-deployable RT-insulated isothermal PCR for the detection of Seneca Valley virus.BMC veterinary research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent outbreaks of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) and porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) in multiple countries have caused significant economic losses and remain a serious challenge to the swine industry. Rapid diagnosis is critical for the implementation of efficient control strategies before and during PEDV and PDCoV outbreaks. Insulated isothermal PCR (iiPCR) on the portable POCKIT™ device is user friendly for on-site pathogen detection. In the present study, a singleplex PEDV RT-iiPCR, a singleplex PDCoV RT-iiPCR, and a duplex PEDV/PDCoV real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) commercial reagents targeting the M gene were compared to an N gene-based PEDV rRT-PCR and an M gene-based PDCoV rRT-PCR that were previously published and used as reference PCRs. All PCR assays were highly specific and did not cross react with other porcine enteric pathogens. Analytical sensitivities of the PEDV RT-iiPCR, PDCoV RT-iiPCR and duplex PEDV/PDCoV rRT-PCR were determined using in vitro transcribed RNA as well as viral RNA extracted from ten-fold serial dilutions of PEDV and PDCoV cell culture isolates. Performance of each PCR assay was further evaluated using 170 clinical samples (86 fecal swabs, 24 feces, 19 intestines, and 41 oral fluids). Compared to the reference PEDV rRT-PCR, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the PEDV RT-iiPCR were 97.73%, 98.78%, and 98.24%, respectively, and those of the duplex PEDV/PDCoV rRT-PCR were 98.86%, 96.34%, and 97.65%, respectively. Compared to the reference PDCoV rRT-PCR, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the PDCoV RT-iiPCR were 100%, 100%, and 100%, respectively, and those of the PEDV/PDCoV duplex rRT-PCR were 96.34%, 100%, and 98.24%, respectively. Overall, all three new PCR assays were comparable to the reference rRT-PCRs for detection of PEDV and/or PDCoV. The PEDV and PDCoV RT-iiPCRs are potentially useful tools for on-site detection and the duplex PEDV/PDCoV rRT-PCR provides a convenient method to simultaneously detect the two viruses and differentiate PEDV from PDCoV.
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.