ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2021
Performance Evaluation of
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of hepatitis C virus core antigen testing for detecting hepatitis C in people living with hepatitis B: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2024Pooled it
- Glycylglycine promotes the solubility and antigenic utility of recombinant HCV structural proteins in a point-of-care immunoassay for detection of active viremia.Microbial cell factories · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimA reliable kit with high sensitivity and specificity is indispensable for diagnosing hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Detection kits for anti-HCV antibodies (anti-HCV) are used for screening, and quantification kits for HCV RNA and HCV antigen (Ag) are used for the definite diagnosis of HCV infection or the evaluation of the pathological condition of and therapeutic effects in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Several kits are currently available for these purposes and are provided for clinical use in Japan. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of these kits.
methodsWe used International Standards for HCV RNA and HCV Ag and a regional reference panel to evaluate the performance of thirteen anti-HCV, five HCV RNA, and two HCV Ag kits.
resultsAll specimens in the regional reference panel were diagnosed correctly by all anti-HCV kits, although the distributions of the quantified values varied, and the ratios of titer classification were not identical across kits. All HCV RNA kits quantified the International Standard with minimum deviation and diagnosed the specimens of the reference panel correctly. The quantified values of the International Standard by two HCV Ag kits were inconsistent. HCV Ag titers of some specimens were underestimated owing to the amino acid polymorphisms in comparison with HCV RNA titers.
conclusionsThe evaluation with International Standards and the regional reference panel was useful for assessing the quality of screening and diagnostic kits for HCV infection, and such quality control is essential for the clinical usage of these kits.
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.