ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2018
Evaluation of Allplex Respiratory Panel 1/2/3 Multiplex Real-Time PCR Assays for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses with Influenza A Virus subtyping.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular subtypes of Adenovirus-associated acute respiratory infection outbreak in children in Northern Vietnam and risk factors of more severe cases.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Article
- Pre-Pandemic Distribution of Bacterial Species in Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens from Pediatric and Adult Patients Detected via RT-PCR Using the Allplex Respiratory Panel.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Developing a Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay for the Rapid Detection of Seven Respiratory Viruses including SARS-CoV-2.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Allplex Respiratory Panels 1, 2, 3, and BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel for the Detection of Respiratory Infections.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Cepheid XpertInfluenza and other respiratory viruses · 2021Article
- Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- Validation of the Seegene RV15 multiplex PCR for the detection of influenza A subtypes and influenza B lineages during national influenza surveillance in hospitalized adults.Journal of medical microbiology · 2020Article
- Characteristics of human parainfluenza virus type 4 infection in hospitalized children in Korea.Pediatrics international : official journal of the Japan Pediatric Society · 2020Article
- Impact of Rapid Molecular Detection of Respiratory Viruses on Clinical Outcomes and Patient Management.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Comparison of the Panther Fusion and Allplex assays for the detection of respiratory viruses in clinical samples.PloS one · 2019Article
- Clinical Performance of the AllplexTM Respiratory Panel 1 Test Compared to SimplexaTM Flu A/B and RSV for Detection of Influenza Virus and Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection Including Their Subtyping.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Allplex Respiratory Panel 1/2/3 (All16) is a multiplex PCR assay for detecting 16 respiratory viruses with influenza A virus (FluA) subtyping, and the first clinical assay based on multiple detection temperatures. We compared the results between All16 and Anyplex II RV16 (Any16) in 426 clinical samples. Samples showing discrepancies between the two tests were further tested using monoplex PCR. FluA subtyping based on the hemagglutinin type results of All16, which yielded H1, H3, and non-H1/H3, was compared with the results of the BioFire FilmArray respiratory panel. The positive and negative percent agreements and kappa value for each virus between All16 and Any16 ranged from 54.5-100.0%, 84.7-100.0%, and 0.57-1.00, respectively. FluA subtype results from All16 for 26 samples were consistent with those from FilmArray. Good agreement was observed between the two methods, except when analyzing human enterovirus (kappa value 0.70), and the All16 showed reliable FluA subtyping results. For parainfluenza virus 3, the All16 was more sensitive than Any16. When testing 28 samples simultaneously, the mean test time and hands-on time were 4.3 and 0.5 hours, respectively in All16. In conclusion, All16 showed reliable performance, but further studies are needed regarding human enterovirus analysis.
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.