Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29113645›Full record

ArticleResearch in veterinary science2019

Discrepancies between feline coronavirus antibody and nucleic acid detection in effusions of cats with suspected feline infectious peritonitis.

Eleonora Lorusso, Viviana Mari, Michele Losurdo, Gianvito Lanave, Adriana Trotta, Giulia Dowgier, Maria Loredana Colaianni, Andrea Zatelli, Gabriella Elia, Domenico Buonavoglia and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research in veterinary science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eleonora LorussoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Viviana MariDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Michele LosurdoDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Gianvito LanaveDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Adriana TrottaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Giulia DowgierDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Maria Loredana ColaianniIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale di Puglia e Basilicata, via Manfredonia 20, 71121 Foggia, Italy.
Andrea ZatelliMedical Consultancy Services, 60, Suite 6, G Cali Street, XBX 1424 Ta' Xbiex, Malta.
Gabriella EliaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Domenico BuonavogliaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy.
Nicola DecaroDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Strada per Casamassima Km 3, Valenzano, Bari 70010, Italy. Electronic address: nicola.decaro@uniba.it.
University of Bari Aldo Moro · ITIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intra-vitam diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) is a challenge for veterinary diagnosticians, since there are no highly specific and sensitive assays currently available. With the aim to contribute to fill this diagnostic gap, a total of 61 effusions from cats with suspected effusive FIP were collected intra-vitam for detection of feline coronavirus (FCoV) antibodies and RNA by means of indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) assay and real-time RT-PCR (qRT-PCR), respectively. In 5 effusions there was no evidence for either FCoV RNA or antibodies, 51 and 52 specimens tested positive by IIF and qRT-PCR, respectively, although antibody titres≥1:1600, which are considered highly suggestive of FIP, were detected only in 37 effusions. Three samples with high antibody levels tested negative by qRT-PCR, whereas 18 qRT-PCR positive effusions contained no or low-titre antibodies. qRT-PCR positive samples with low antibody titres mostly contained low FCoV RNA loads, although the highest antibody titres were detected in effusions with C

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, ViralAscitic FluidCatsCoronavirus, FelineFeline Infectious PeritonitisReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, ViralAntibodies, ViralRNA, ViralAntibodiesDiagnosisEffusionsFeline infectious peritonitisViral RNA

Identifiers

PMID29113645
PMCPMC7111774
OpenAlexW2765680473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.