Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34442742›Full record

ArticleMicroorganisms2021

Comparison of Direct and Indirect

Kaya C Stollberg, Gereon Schares, Anne Mayer-Scholl, Iryna Hrushetska, Susanne Diescher, Annette Johne, Martin H Richter, Nadja S Bier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microorganisms, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  5. A ring trial to harmonize Toxoplasma gondii microsatellite typing: comparative analysis of results and recommendations for optimization.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kaya C StollbergGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Safety in the Food Chain, 10589 Berlin, Germany.
Gereon ScharesNational Reference Laboratory for Toxoplasmosis, Institute of Epidemiology, Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut (FLI), Federal Research Institute for Animal Health, 17493 Greifswald, Insel Riems, Germany.
Anne Mayer-SchollGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Biological Safety, 12277 Berlin, Germany.
Iryna HrushetskaGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Biological Safety, 12277 Berlin, Germany.
Susanne DiescherGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Biological Safety, 12277 Berlin, Germany.
Annette JohneGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Biological Safety, 12277 Berlin, Germany.
Martin H RichterGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Biological Safety, 12277 Berlin, Germany.
Nadja S BierGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department for Biological Safety, 12277 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1215-7246
Federal Institute for Risk Assessment · DEFriedrich-Loeffler-Institut · DE

Funding

German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment BfR 1322-672, 8-002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of game as a source of

Indexed as

bioassaydeermagnetic capturePCR-RFLPpepsin digestionqPCRserologytoxoplasmosiswild boarzoonosis

Identifiers

PMID34442742
PMCPMC8399173
OpenAlexW3187559877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.