ArticleJournal of equine science2023
Enhanced detection of
Article in Journal of equine science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection of Taylorella equigenitalis (CEMO) in the horse uses genital swabs. These swabs traditionally have been put in Amies charcoal transport medium for detection by culture but are also used for PCR. We determined the suitability of swabs without transport medium (Dry swabs) for CEMO PCR compared to swabs in Amies charcoal transport medium. The experiment was a factorial design using swab type and dilution of organism in culture suspensions, done in two parts. Simulated genital swabs were prepared in the laboratory by dipping in pairs into culture suspensions containing T. equigenitalis with or without other organisms, and then inserting them into a sleeve either with or without transport medium. In study 1, the difference in Ct value for the two swab types was compared. In study 2 genital swab material was then also added to culture suspensions and the swab types again compared. The swabs were tested by a validated quantitative PCR method. The Ct value of the PCR test was used as the measure for comparison, and the effect of variables assessed with linear regression. There was an 7.7% (6.5-8.9) higher mean Ct value of TM versus Dry swabs (P<0.001) overall. The Ct difference was more marked at higher dilutions. Addition of genital swab material had no effect on the Ct value. Dry swabs perform at least as well for PCR as swabs in Amies charcoal transport medium, especially when relatively low numbers of organism are present, and are advantageous for routine sampling when culture is not being used.
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.