Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29860932›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc2018

Evaluation of a duplex reverse-transcription real-time PCR assay for the detection of encephalomyocarditis virus.

Shaomin Qin, Darren Underwood, Luke Driver, Carol Kistler, Ibrahim Diallo, Peter D Kirkland

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 45% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Encephalomyocarditis Virus in Non-Domesticated Species.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Shaomin QinVirology Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agriculture Institute, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, New South Wales, Australia (Qin, Kirkland).
Darren UnderwoodVirology Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agriculture Institute, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, New South Wales, Australia (Qin, Kirkland).
Luke DriverVirology Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agriculture Institute, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, New South Wales, Australia (Qin, Kirkland).
Carol KistlerVirology Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agriculture Institute, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, New South Wales, Australia (Qin, Kirkland).
Ibrahim DialloVirology Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agriculture Institute, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, New South Wales, Australia (Qin, Kirkland).
Peter D KirklandVirology Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agriculture Institute, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Menangle, New South Wales, Australia (Qin, Kirkland).
Guangxi Veterinary Research Institute · CNNew South Wales Department of Primary Industries · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We evaluated a fluorogenic probe-based assay for the detection of encephalomyocarditis virus (EMCV) by comparing a set of published primers and probe to a new set of primers and probe. The published reagents failed to amplify a range of Australian isolates and an Italian reference strain of EMCV. In contrast, an assay based on 2 new sets of primers and probes that were run in a duplex reverse-transcription real-time PCR (RT-rtPCR) worked well, with high amplification efficiency. The analytical sensitivity was ~100-fold higher than virus isolation in cell culture. The intra-assay variation was 0.21-4.90%. No cross-reactivity was observed with a range of other porcine viruses. One hundred and twenty-two clinical specimens were tested simultaneously by RT-rtPCR and virus isolation in cell culture; 72 specimens gave positive results by RT-rtPCR, and 63 of these were also positive by virus isolation. Of 245 archived cell culture isolates of EMCV that were tested in the RT-rtPCR, 242 samples were positive. The new duplex RT-rtPCR assay is a reliable tool for the detection of EMCV in clinical specimens and for use in epidemiologic investigations.

Indexed as

AnimalsAustraliaCamelidaeCardiovirus InfectionsCattleDNA PrimersEncephalomyocarditis virusMarsupialiaReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, ViralSensitivity and SpecificitySpecies SpecificitySwineDNA PrimersRNA, ViralEncephalomyocarditis virusreverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction

Identifiers

PMID29860932
PMCPMC6505904
OpenAlexW2807207786

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.