ArticleFood and environmental virology2019
Norovirus Monitoring in Oysters Using Two Different Extraction Methods.
Article in Food and environmental virology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Whole genome sequencing of hepatitis A virus: adapting Illumina protocols for foodborne investigation.NPJ science of food · 2025Article
- Quantification and Genotyping of Norovirus in Aerosols from Wastewater Treatment Plants in Thailand.Food and environmental virology · 2025Article
- Review
- Spatial Distribution and Enrichment Dynamics of Foodborne Norovirus in Oyster Tissues.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Detection of Norovirus Recombinant GII.2[P16] Strains in Oysters in Thailand.Food and environmental virology · 2022Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection of noroviruses in bivalve shellfish is difficult because of the low concentration of norovirus and the presence of reverse transcription (RT)-PCR inhibitors. This study aimed to assess the presence of noroviruses in oysters extracted using a proteinase K extraction (ISO 15216 method) and an adsorption-elution method. Seventy oyster samples were extracted using the two extraction methods and evaluated using RT-nested PCR. The results showed norovirus detection rates at an equal frequency of 28.6%, of which a total of 48 (68.6%) samples had corresponding positive or negative results, while there were 22 (31.4%) samples with discrepant results. Norovirus genogroup (G)I, GII, and mixed GI and GII were detected in 20%, 4.3%, and 4.3% of samples, respectively, by the proteinase K extraction method, which comprised of GI.2, GI.5b, GI.6b, GII.4, and GII.17 genotypes. With the adsorption-elution method noroviruses were detected in 17.1%, 8.6%, and 2.9% of samples, respectively, which comprised of GI.2, GII.2, GII.4, and GII.17 genotypes. All norovirus-positive oyster samples were further estimated for genome copy number using RT-quantitative PCR. The oyster samples processed using the adsorption-elution method contained norovirus GI of 3.36 × 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
31342414What 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.