ArticleMicrobial biotechnology2023
Optimization of the molecular diagnosis of the acute hepatitis E virus infection.
Article in Microbial biotechnology, 2023. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Burden of Symptomatic HEV-3 Infection in Southern Spain.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Spillover of Rat Hepatitis E Virus into Humans: An Emerging Zoonosis?Future virology · 2025Article
- Systematic Evaluation of Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hepatitis E Virus Infection.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2024Review
- Hepatitis E virus infections.World journal of virology · 2024Article
- Review
- Optimization of the molecular diagnosis of the acute hepatitis E virus infection.Microbial biotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the diagnostic value of the combination of two broad-range PCR assays targeting two different and conserved regions of the viral genome for the diagnosis of acute Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection. Patients with acute hepatitis were prospectively recruited. In all, HEV-IgM antibodies were tested together with evaluation of HEV viraemia by two PCR assays (ORF3 and ORF1). The number of individuals exhibiting negative IgM antibody results but carrying viral RNA was calculated by each PCR assay. Four-hundred and seventy individuals were included, of whom 145 (30.8%) were diagnosed as having acute HEV. Of them, 122 (84.1%) exhibited HEV-IgM antibodies, and 81 (55.8%) had detectable viral RNA for at least one PCR. Using the ORF3 molecular assay, 70 (48.3%) individuals were identified with HEV infection. When the ORF1 molecular assay was applied, 49 (33.8%) individuals were identified. The ORF3 assay detected viral RNA in 32 patients not detected by the ORF1 assay. In contrast, the ORF1 assay could amplify viral RNA in 11 patients who were not detected by the ORF3 assay. The parallel use of two broad-range PCR assays significantly increased the performance of the molecular diagnosis of HEV.
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.