ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2017
Comparison of eMAG™ versus NucliSENS
Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shaken, not stirred: magnetic bead DNA extraction as a rapid and effective method for the scaling up of bovine tuberculosis diagnosis.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- SARS-CoV-2 Variants May Affect Saliva RT-PCR Assay Sensitivity.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2024Article
- Viral infection in chronic otitis media with effusion in children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Infant deaths from respiratory syncytial virus in Lusaka, Zambia from the ZPRIME study: a 3-year, systematic, post-mortem surveillance project.The Lancet. Global health · 2022Article
- Comparison of Nucleic Acid Extraction Methods for a Viral Metagenomics Analysis of Respiratory Viruses.Microorganisms · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundeMAG™ (bioMerieux) is a new nucleic acid extraction platform based on magnetic silica technology, like its predecessor, NucliSENS
objectiveTo compare the performance of eMAG™ and easyMAG STUDY
designRespiratory (n=199), whole blood (n=50), plasma (n=25) and urine (n=25) specimens were extracted in parallel on both platforms. Both qualitative (respiratory virus, cell control, CMV, EBV, HHV6 and BKV detection) and quantitative (respiratory virus and cell control cycle thresolds, and CMV, EBV, HHV6 and BKV viral loads) results were compared.
resultsDetection of qualitative targets showed good agreement, ranging from 84.6% for whole blood to 95.9% for respiratory specimens. Correlations between quantitative results were good, with R
conclusionsThe two platforms showed comparable performance on the types of clinical specimen tested. With higher automation and throughput than easyMAG
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.