Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34252511›Full record

ArticleJournal of virological methods2021

Assessing sensitivity and reproducibility of RT-ddPCR and RT-qPCR for the quantification of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater.

Mark Ciesielski, Denene Blackwood, Thomas Clerkin, Raul Gonzalez, Hannah Thompson, Allison Larson, Rachel Noble

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virological methods, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 99 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Critical Evaluation of Key Methods for RNA Quantification.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mark CiesielskiInstitute of Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Morehead City, North Carolina, United States.
Denene BlackwoodInstitute of Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Morehead City, North Carolina, United States.
Thomas ClerkinInstitute of Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Morehead City, North Carolina, United States.
Raul GonzalezHampton Roads Sanitation District, Virginia Beach, Virginia, United States.
Hannah ThompsonHampton Roads Sanitation District, Virginia Beach, Virginia, United States.
Allison LarsonHampton Roads Sanitation District, Virginia Beach, Virginia, United States.
Rachel NobleInstitute of Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Morehead City, North Carolina, United States. Electronic address: rtnoble@email.unc.edu.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USHampton Roads Sanitation District · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Throughout the COVID-19 global pandemic there has been significant interest and investment in using Wastewater-Based Epidemiology (WBE) for surveillance of viral pathogen presence and infections at the community level. There has been a push for widescale implementation of standardized protocols to quantify viral loads in a range of wastewater systems. To address concerns regarding sensitivity, limits of quantification, and large-scale reproducibility, a comparison of two similar workflows using RT-qPCR and RT-ddPCR was conducted. Sixty raw wastewater influent samples were acquired from nine distinct wastewater treatment plants (WWTP's) served by the Hampton Roads Sanitation District (HRSD, Virginia Beach, Virginia) over a 6-month period beginning March 9th, 2020. Common reagents, controls, master mixes and nucleic acid extracts were shared between two individual processing groups based out of HRSD and the UNC Chapel Hill Institute of Marine Sciences (IMS, Morehead City, North Carolina). Samples were analyzed in parallel using One-Step RT-qPCR and One-Step RT-ddPCR with Nucleocapsid Protein 2 (N2) specific primers and probe. Influent SARS-CoV-2 N2 concentrations steadily increased over time spanning a range from non-detectable to 2.13E + 05 copies/L. Systematic dilution of the extracts indicated that inhibitory components in the wastewater matrices did not significantly impede the detection of a positive N2 signal for either workflow. The RT-ddPCR workflow had a greater analytical sensitivity with a lower Limit of Detection (LOD) at 0.066 copies/μl of template compared to RT-qPCR with a calculated LOD of 12.0 copies/μL of template. Interlaboratory comparisons using non-parametric correlation analysis demonstrated that there was a strong, significant, positive correlation between split extracts when employing RT-ddPCR for analysis with a ρ value of 0.86.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsRNA, ViralWastewaterRNA, ViralWastewaterMolecular methodsPCRSARS-CoV-2Wastewater

Identifiers

PMID34252511
PMCPMC8267102
OpenAlexW3178987874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.