ArticlePloS one2021
From a case-control survey to a diagnostic viral gastroenteritis panel for testing of general practitioners' patients.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Asymptomatic Shedding of Enteric Viruses in Young Children: Insights From a Year-Long Prospective Surveillance Study.Journal of medical virology · 2025Article
- Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Panels for Gastrointestinal Infections: Current Evidence, Regulatory Hurdles, and the Way Forward.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Is it time to switch to a formulation other than the live attenuated poliovirus vaccine to prevent poliomyelitis?Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the pathogenicity of a broad range of 11 possible gastroenteritis viruses, by means of statistical relationships with cases vs. controls, or Ct-values, in order to establish the most appropriate diagnostic panel for our general practitioner (GP) patients in the Netherlands (2010-2012).
methodsArchived stool samples from 1340 cases and 1100 controls were retested using internally controlled multiplex real-time PCRs for putative pathogenic gastroenteritis viruses: adenovirus, astrovirus, bocavirus, enterovirus, norovirus GI and GII, human parechovirus, rotavirus, salivirus, sapovirus, and torovirus.
resultsThe prevalence of any virus in symptomatic cases and asymptomatic controls was 16.6% (223/1340) and 10.2% (112/1100), respectively. Prevalence of astrovirus (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 10.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34-80.06) and norovirus GII (aOR 3.10; CI 1.62-5.92) was significantly higher in cases versus controls. Rotavirus was encountered only in cases. We did not find torovirus and there was no statistically significant relationship with cases for salivirus (aOR 1,67; (CI) 0.43-6.54)), adenovirus non-group F (aOR 1.20; CI 0.75-1.91), bocavirus (aOR 0.85; CI 0.05-13.64), enterovirus (aOR 0.83; CI 0.50-1.37), human parechovirus (aOR 1.61; CI 0.54-4.77) and sapovirus (aOR 1.15; CI 0.67-1.98). Though adenovirus group F (aOR 6.37; CI 0.80-50.92) and norovirus GI (aOR 2.22, CI: 0.79-6.23) are known enteropathogenic viruses and were more prevalent in cases than in controls, this did not reach significance in this study. The Ct value did not discriminate between carriage and disease in PCR-positive subjects.
conclusionsIn our population, diagnostic gastroenteritis tests should screen for adenovirus group F, astrovirus, noroviruses GI and GII, and rotavirus. Case-control studies as ours are lacking and should also be carried out in populations from other epidemiological backgrounds.
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.