ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2018
Development and evaluation of a rapid nucleic acid amplification method to detect influenza A and B viruses in human respiratory specimens.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cu-MOF-NHMikrochimica acta · 2026Article
- Single centre experience: Managing seasonal influenza without a point-of-care test.Journal of infection prevention · 2023Article
- Review
- Impact of a PCR point of care test for influenza A/B on an acute medical unit in a large UK teaching hospital: results of an observational, pre and post intervention study.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Observational
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
Isothermal nucleic acid amplification methods can potentially shorten the amount of time required to diagnose influenza. We developed and evaluated a novel isothermal nucleic acid amplification method, RT-SIBA to rapidly detect and differentiate between influenza A and B viruses in a single reaction tube. The performance of the RT-SIBA Influenza assay was compared with two established RT-PCR methods. The sensitivities of the RT-SIBA, RealStar RT-PCR, and CDC RT-PCR assays for the detection of influenza A and B viruses in the clinical specimens were 98.8%, 100%, and 89.3%, respectively. All three assays demonstrated a specificity of 100%. The average time to positive result was significantly shorter with the RT-SIBA Influenza assay (<20 min) than with the two RT-PCR assays (>90 min). The method can be run using battery-operated, portable devices with a small footprint and therefore has potential applications in both laboratory and near-patient settings.
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.