Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29259944›Full record

ArticleIranian journal of public health2017

The Comparison of Sensitivity and Specificity of ELISA-based Microneutralization Test with Hemagglutination Inhibition Test to Evaluate Neutralizing Antibody against Influenza Virus (H1N1).

Ahmad Tavakoli, Farhad Rezaei, Gazal Sadat Fatemi Nasab, Fatemeh Adjaminezhad-Fard, Zahra Noroozbabaei, Talat Mokhtari-Azad

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Integrating metagenomics and metatranscriptomics intoThe Journal of general virology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ahmad TavakoliDept. of Virology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Farhad RezaeiDept. of Virology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Gazal Sadat Fatemi NasabDept. of Virology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Fatemeh Adjaminezhad-FardDept. of Virology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Zahra NoroozbabaeiDept. of Virology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Talat Mokhtari-AzadDept. of Virology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Allama Iqbal Medical College · PKNishtar Medical College and Hospital · PKServices Institute of Medical Sciences · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe most common serological assay to measure anti-influenza antibodies is hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. Recently, neutralizing antibodies against influenza virus infection or vaccination can also be detected using microneutralization assays and occasionally, have greater sensitivity than the standard HI assays. The study aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of ELISA-based microneutralization (microNT-ELISA) and conventional HI assays in order to detect influenza H1N1 virus antibodies.

methodsMicroNT-ELISA was set up according to the WHO Manual on Influenza Diagnosis and Surveillance in Virology Department of Tehran University of Medical Sciences for the detection of neutralizing antibodies against H1N1 influenza virus in 2013. Fifty serum samples were analyzed with both HI and microNT-ELISA assays. Correlation between methods was calculated by linear regression analysis.

resultsThe linear correlation coefficient squares, R2, of microNT-ELISA and HI test was 0.61 (

conclusionThe sensitivity and specificity of microNT-ELISA assay were high (87% and 73%, respectively) and closely related to gold standard test results. Therefore, microNT-ELISA is recommended as an alternative or complementary test to conventional HI assay for serological and epidemiological purposes.

Indexed as

Hemagglutination inhibition assayInfluenza virusMicroneutralization assayMicroNT-ELISASerological assays

Identifiers

PMID29259944
PMCPMC5734969
OpenAlexW2771553721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.