Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27862288›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2017

Commercially Available Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests for Detection of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus Infection.

J Nichols, H Y Weng, A Litster, C Leutenegger, L Guptill

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 2020 AAFP Feline Retrovirus Testing and Management Guidelines.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2020
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

J NicholsDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
H Y WengDepartment of Comparative Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
A LitsterDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
C LeuteneggerIDEXX Laboratories, West Sacramento, CA.
L GuptillDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Purdue University West Lafayette · USIDEXX Laboratories (France) · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFeline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection is an important cause of disease of cats worldwide. Initial screening is commonly performed by commercially available point-of-care (POC) ELISA tests. Confirmatory testing for positive POC test results is recommended. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for FIV are commonly used additional testing methods; however, reported measures of diagnostic accuracy vary widely between PCR tests, making interpretation of results difficult. HYPOTHESIS/

objectiveThere is very good agreement between results of a commercially available PCR test and a POC ELISA test for FIV for specimens collected from owned and shelter-housed cats. ANIMALS: Blood samples from 168 cats from 2 adoption guarantee shelters, an FIV Sanctuary, and 64 private homes were used.

methodsThis was a prospective study. Whole blood samples were collected in K

resultsThere was very good agreement between ELISA and PCR (kappa 0.87; P < .001; 95% CI 0.79, 0.95). Of 168 cats, eleven had discordant ELISA/PCR results: 7 ELISA+/PCR- and 4 ELISA-/PCR+. Using VI as a reference standard, there were 4 false-positive PCR results, 5 false-positive ELISA results, and 1 false-negative PCR result (1 cat lost to follow-up). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: While there was good agreement between the POC ELISA and PCR tests, the discordant results highlight the importance of cautious interpretation of test results and the necessity of confirmatory testing.

Indexed as

AnimalsCat DiseasesCatsEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleImmunodeficiency Virus, FelineLongitudinal StudiesMaleProspective StudiesReagent Kits, DiagnosticReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionRetroviridae InfectionsSensitivity and SpecificityReagent Kits, DiagnosticDiagnosisInfectious diseaseRetrovirus

Identifiers

PMID27862288
PMCPMC5259642
OpenAlexW2549813600

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.