ArticlePloS one2016
Successes and Short Comings in Four Years of an International External Quality Assurance Program for Animal Influenza Surveillance.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- COVID 19 pandemic testing time - Crisis or opportunity in disguise for India?Seminars in oncology · 2021Review
- Clinical-Forensic Autopsy Findings to Defeat COVID-19 Disease: A Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The US National institutes of Health-Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance is a research consortium that funds numerous labs worldwide to conduct influenza A surveillance in diverse animal species. There is no harmonization of testing procedures among these labs; therefore an external quality assurance (EQA) program was implemented to evaluate testing accuracy among labs in the program in 2012. Accurate detection of novel influenza A variants is crucial because of the broad host range and potentially high virulence of the virus in diverse species. Two molecular detection sample sets and 2 serology sample sets (one with avian origin isolates, and one with mammalian origin isolates each) were made available at approximately six month intervals. Participating labs tested the material in accordance with their own protocols. During a five year period a total of 41 labs from 23 countries ordered a total of 132 avian molecular, 121 mammalian molecular and 90 serology sample sets. Testing was completed by 111 individuals. Detection of type A influenza by RT-PCR was reliable with a pass rate (80% or greater agreement with expected results) of 86.6% for avian and 86.2% for mammalian origin isolates. However, identification of subtype by RT-PCR was relatively poor with 54.1% and 75.9% accuracy for avian and mammalian influenza isolates respectively. Serological testing had an overall pass rate of 86.9% and 22/23 labs used commercial ELISA kits. Based on the results of this EQA program six labs modified their procedures to improve accuracy and one lab identified an unknown equipment problem. These data represent the successful implementation of an international EQA program for an infectious disease; insights into the logistics and test design are also discussed.
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.