Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35859424›Full record

ReviewThe Indian journal of medical research2022

Urinary immunoglobulins in viral diagnosis: An overview.

Sreelekshmy Mohandas, Sudeep Balan, Devendra T Mourya

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Indian journal of medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Erratum: Urinary immunoglobulins in viral diagnosis: An overview.The Indian journal of medical research · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sreelekshmy MohandasMaximum Containment Facility, ICMR- National Institute of Virology, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Sudeep BalanEntomology Division, ICMR- National Institute of Virology, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Devendra T MouryaICMR-Chair for Virology & Zoonoses, ICMR- National Institute of Virology, Pune, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antibody detection by serological methods gained a lot of interest in recent years and has become the backbone of virological diagnosis. Despite the detection of all five classes of immunoglobulins in urine, not much attention has been paid to the use of urine as a diagnostic sample to detect viral antibodies. Unlike venipuncture, this non-invasive mode of sample collection can help cover all age groups, especially paediatric and old age patients, where blood collection is difficult. Using urine as a sample is also economical and involves lesser risk in sample collection. The antibodies are found to be stable in urine at room temperature for a prolonged period, which makes the sample transport management easier as well. A few recent studies, have also shown that the detection limit of antibodies in urine is at par with serum or other clinical material. So, the ease in sample collection, availability of samples in large quantity and stability of immunoglobulins in urine for prolonged periods can make urine an ideal sample for viral diagnosis.

Indexed as

Antibodies, ViralSpecimen HandlingChildHumansAntibodies, ViralAntibody detectiondiagnosticsimmunoglobulinsurineviral diseases

Identifiers

PMID35859424
PMCPMC9552372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.