ArticleJournal of equine science2018
Evaluation of two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for the detection of antibodies against equine arteritis virus.
Article in Journal of equine science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to establish an efficient system for serological diagnosis of equine viral arteritis in Japan, we compared enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) provided by two manufacturers (Nisseiken Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan, and VMRD Inc., Pullman, WA, U.S.A.) by testing a series of horse sera. The results revealed that 159 of 160 virus-neutralizing (VN) antibody-positive serum samples were positive in both the Nisseiken-ELISA and VMRD-ELISA. Of the VN-negative sera (n=157), 134 and 154 samples were negative in the Nisseiken-ELISA and VMRD-ELISA, respectively. Sensitivity was 99.4% for both the Nisseiken-ELISA and VMRD-ELISA. The specificity of the VMRD-ELISA (98.1%) was significantly higher than that of the Nisseiken-ELISA (85.4%, P<0.05). The diagnostic performance of the VMRD-ELISA was superior to that of the Nisseiken-ELISA because of this greater specificity.
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.