ArticleJournal of virological methods2018
Comparison of somatic and F+ coliphage enumeration methods with large volume surface water samples.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Bayesian Model for Estimation of Virus Reduction in Potable Reuse Treatment Trains and Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Waterborne Viral Pathogens.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026Article
- Evaluation of dead-end hollowfiber ultrafilter options for enumerating somatic and F+ coliphage in ambient waters and wastewater.Journal of virological methods · 2026Article
- Evaluating phage lytic activity: from plaque assays to single-cell technologies.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Detection of the clinically persistent, pathogenic yeast spp. Candida auris from hospital and municipal wastewater in Miami-Dade County, Florida.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- The Effect of Protozoa Indigenous to Lakewater and Wastewater on Decay of Fecal Indicator Bacteria and Coliphage.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Assessment of two volumetrically different concentration approaches to improve sensitivities for SARS-CoV-2 detection during wastewater monitoring.Journal of virological methods · 2023Article
- Performance evaluation of a dead-end hollowfiber ultrafiltration method for enumeration of somatic and F+ coliphage from recreational waters.Journal of virological methods · 2021Article
- Development of a large volume concentration method for recovery of coronavirus from wastewater.The Science of the total environment · 2021Article
- Spiked Virus Level Needed To Correctly Assess Enteric Virus Recovery in Water Matrices.Applied and environmental microbiology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Coliphages are alternative fecal indicators that may be suitable surrogates for viral pathogens, but majority of standard detection methods utilize insufficient volumes for routine detection in environmental waters. We compared three somatic and F+ coliphage methods based on a paired measurement from 1 L samples collected from the Great Lakes (n = 74). Methods include: 1) dead-end hollow fiber ultrafilter with single agar layer (D-HFUF-SAL); 2) modified SAL (M-SAL); and 3) direct membrane filtration (DMF) technique. Overall, D-HFUF-SAL outperformed other methods as it yielded the lowest frequency of non-detects [(ND); 10.8%] and the highest average concentrations of recovered coliphage for positive samples (2.51 ± 1.02 [standard deviation, SD] log
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.