ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2019
Determination of antibody induction by highly pathogenic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (HP-PRRSV) vaccine: A comparison of two ELISA kits.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative epidemiology and preparedness for African swine fever and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome in four major Asian swine industries.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Establishment of an indirect ELISA detection method for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus NSP4.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Research Progress on the detection methods of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Establishment of a peptide-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for detecting antibodies against PRRSV M protein.BMC veterinary research · 2021Article
- On-site differential diagnostic detection of HP-PRRSV and C-PRRSV using EuNPs-mAb fluorescent probe-based immunoassay.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two commercial porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) antibody ELISA kits (IDEXX and LSI) are currently in extensive use. To determine which kit is more suitable for the evaluation of HP-PRRSV vaccine efficacy, the two kits were used to test 546 serum samples. The agreement between the results was unsatisfactory, with a kappa statistic of 0.681 and a linear correlation coefficient of 0.665. In tests of samples from experimentally vaccinated and PRRSV-negative herds, IDEXX-ELISA identified antibody-positive conversion earlier and showed a higher specificity compared to LSI-ELISA. The serological profile obtained by neutralization testing was closer to that obtained by IDEXX-ELISA than by LSI-ELISA in the late immunization period. The findings reveal that IDEXX-ELISA is the more suitable for the evaluation of antibody response to HP-PRRSV vaccine and for guiding vaccination strategies.
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.