ArticleJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc2018
Comparison of cross-matching method for detection of DEA 7 blood incompatibility.
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 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Three Feline Crossmatch Methods-Tube, Gel Column, and Immunochromatographic Strip.Veterinary clinical pathology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of post-transfusion RBC alloimmunization in dogs using a gel-column crossmatch with and without anti-canine globulin enhancement.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2024Article
- Alloimmunization in dogs after transfusion: A serial cross-match study.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2022Article
- Canine Blood Group Prevalence and Geographical Distribution around the World: An Updated Systematic Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared 3 major cross-match (XM) tests to identify dog erythrocyte antigen (DEA) 7 blood incompatibilities in dogs as a result of anti-DEA 7 antibodies: gel (GEL), standard tube (TUBE) agglutination, and immunochromatography strips (STRIP). Blood samples from 42 dogs were typed for DEA 7; 2 tested DEA 7-positive (DEA 7+). The 40 DEA 7-negative (DEA 7-) plasma samples were cross-matched against the 2 DEA 7+ and 3 DEA 7- red blood cell (RBC) samples by GEL to identify samples with anti-DEA 7 antibodies. Twenty DEA 7- plasma samples without and with anti-DEA 7 antibodies were cross-matched with samples of the 2 DEA 7+ RBCs in a double-blind fashion using the TUBE and STRIP XM methods. GEL results were used as the reference method for comparison. To determine relationships between results, 2 × 2 tables were used. Cohen kappa coefficient (κ) was calculated between results of GEL and the other 2 methods. With GEL, 21 of 40 XM tests were positive and 19 of 40 negative for anti-DEA 7 antibodies. The same results were obtained by TUBE, whereas only 1 of 40 XM tests was positive by STRIP. There was a statistically significant relationship between results of GEL and TUBE ( p < 0.000) with perfect agreement (κ = 1.000), but not between GEL and STRIP results ( p = 1.000) in which agreement was equivalent to chance (κ = 0.0453). The GEL and TUBE XM tests, but not STRIP, are useful methods for identification of DEA 7 incompatibilities caused by anti-DEA 7 antibodies.
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.