Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35077518›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

An intercomparison study of ELISAs for the detection of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus - evaluating six conditionally dependent tests.

Clara Schoneberg, Jens Böttcher, Britta Janowetz, Anja Rostalski, Lothar Kreienbrock, Amely Campe

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Clara SchonebergDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health in the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University for Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9234-190X
Jens BöttcherBavarian Animal Health Service, Poing, Germany.
Britta JanowetzBavarian Animal Health Service, Poing, Germany.
Anja RostalskiBavarian Animal Health Service, Poing, Germany.
Lothar KreienbrockDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health in the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University for Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Amely CampeDepartment of Biometry, Epidemiology and Information Processing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training for Health in the Human-Animal-Environment Interface, University for Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Latent class analysis is a widely used statistical method for evaluating diagnostic tests without any gold standard. It requires the results of at least two tests applied to the same individuals. Based on the resulting response patterns, the method estimates the test accuracy and the unknown disease status for all individuals in the sample. An important assumption is the conditional independence of the tests. If tests with the same biological principle are used, the assumption is not fulfilled, which may lead to biased results. In a recent publication, we developed a method that considers the dependencies in the latent class model and estimates all parameters using frequentist methods. Here, we evaluate the practicability of the method by applying it to the results of six ELISA tests for antibodies against the porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus in pigs that generally follow the same biological principle. First, we present different methods of identifying suitable starting values for the algorithm and apply these to the dataset and a vaccinated subgroup. We present the calculated values of the test accuracies, the estimated proportion of antibody-positive animals and the dependency structure for both datasets. Different starting values led to matching results for the entire dataset. For the vaccinated subgroup, the results were more dependent on the selected starting values. All six ELISA tests are well suited to detect antibodies against PRRS virus, whereas none of the tests had the best values for sensitivity and specificity simultaneously. The results thus show that the method used is able to determine the parameter values of conditionally dependent tests with suitable starting values. The choice of test should be based on the general fit-for-purpose concept and the population under study.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, ViralEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleMalePorcine Reproductive and Respiratory SyndromePorcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virusSwineAntibodies, Viral

Identifiers

PMID35077518
PMCPMC8789123

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.