ArticleJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc2018
Field evaluation of two commercial RT-rtPCR assays for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus detection using sera from ill and healthy pigs, China.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence, Time of Infection, and Diversity of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus in China.Viruses · 2024Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) is a highly contagious respiratory virus causing severe morbidity in pigs worldwide. Control strategies for PRRSV often rely on detecting PRRSV, culling or isolating sick pigs, disinfecting pig barns, vaccination, and monitoring for virus spread. Given the high economic impact of PRRSV on pig farms, there is a great need for rapid and reliable PRRSV detection assays. We compared the performance of 2 commercial reverse-transcription real-time PCR (RT-rtPCR) assays, the VetMAX PRRSV NA and EU reagents (ABI assay) and the PRRSV general RT-rtPCR kit (Anheal assay), for the molecular detection of PRRSV in sera collected from pigs in China. Between June and September 2015, sera were collected from 219 healthy and 104 suspected PRRSV-infected pigs on 4 farms in China. Employing blinding, the 2 assays were run by 2 laboratories (Guangzhou Animal Health Inspection Institute [GAHII] and Sun Yat-sen University [SYSU] laboratories) and compared. Although both assays detected PRRSV with 100% specificity at both laboratories, the sensitivity (95% vs. 78% at GAHII; 94% vs. 72% at SYSU Laboratory) and the reproducibility (kappa value 0.933 vs. 0.931) were slightly better for the ABI assay compared to the Anheal assay.
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.