ReviewMicroorganisms2022
Real-Time PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Hepatitis E Virus in Pork Products: A Critical Review.
Review in Microorganisms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of Infectious Hepatitis E Virus in Retail Pork Pâté After Optimization of Extraction Protocols.Viruses · 2026Article
- Trends and Challenges in the Detection and Environmental Surveillance of the Hepatitis E Virus.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Food Homogenates on Cell Survival In Vitro.Food and environmental virology · 2024Article
- Changes in Hepatitis E Virus Contamination during the Production of Liver Sausage from Naturally Contaminated Pig Liver and the Potential of Individual Production Parameters to Reduce Hepatitis E Virus Contamination in the Processing Chain.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Development of a Sensitive and Specific Quantitative RT-qPCR Method for the Detection of Hepatitis E Virus Genotype 3 in Porcine Liver and Foodstuff.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Standard methods for detection of hepatitis A virus and norovirus in at-risk foodstuffs are available, but currently there is no standard method for detection of hepatitis E virus (HEV) in pork products or other foods that can be contaminated with the virus. Detection assays for HEV are mainly based on nucleic acid amplification, particularly the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RTPCR) in real-time format. RTPCR-based methods can be sensitive and specific, but they require a suite of controls to verify that they have performed correctly. There have been several RTPCR methods developed to detect HEV in pork products, varying in details of sample preparation and RTPCR target sequences. This review critically discusses published HEV detection methods, with emphasis on those that have been successfully used in subsequent studies and surveys. RTPCR assays have been used both qualitatively and quantitatively, although in the latter case the data acquired are only reliable if appropriate assay calibration has been performed. One particular RTPCR assay appears to be ideal for incorporation in a standard method, as it has been demonstrated to be highly specific and sensitive, and an appropriate control and calibration standard is available. The review focuses on the detection of HEV in pork products and similar foodstuffs (e.g., boar). The information may be useful to inform standardisation activities.
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.