Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37461338›Full record

ReviewCurrent molecular medicine2024

Molecular Methods for Diagnosis of Monkeypox: A Mini-review.

Rodrigo Michelini de Oliveira Thomasi, Thais da Silva Correa, Dalise Silva do Carmo, Déborah Fernandes Rodrigues, Luiz Vinicius da Silva Correa, Sandra Rodrigues Xavier, Líria Souza Silva, Jonatas Oliveira da Silva, Michelli Dos Santos, Alessandra da Silva Dantas and 6 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current molecular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Rodrigo Michelini de Oliveira ThomasiDisciplina Biotecnologia e Inovações, Programa de Pós-graduação em Biotecnologia e Programa Multicentrico de Pós-graduação em Bíoquimica e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal de São João Del- Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Thais da Silva CorreaDisciplina Biotecnologia e Inovações, Programa de Pós-graduação em Biotecnologia e Programa Multicentrico de Pós-graduação em Bíoquimica e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal de São João Del- Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Dalise Silva do CarmoDisciplina Biotecnologia e Inovações, Programa de Pós-graduação em Biotecnologia e Programa Multicentrico de Pós-graduação em Bíoquimica e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal de São João Del- Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Déborah Fernandes RodriguesDisciplina Biotecnologia e Inovações, Programa de Pós-graduação em Biotecnologia e Programa Multicentrico de Pós-graduação em Bíoquimica e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal de São João Del- Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Luiz Vinicius da Silva CorreaDisciplina Biotecnologia e Inovações, Programa de Pós-graduação em Biotecnologia e Programa Multicentrico de Pós-graduação em Bíoquimica e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal de São João Del- Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Sandra Rodrigues XavierDisciplina Biotecnologia e Inovações, Programa de Pós-graduação em Biotecnologia e Programa Multicentrico de Pós-graduação em Bíoquimica e Biologia Molecular, Universidade Federal de São João Del- Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Líria Souza SilvaLaboratório de Biotecnologia de Microrganismos, Universidade Federal de São João Del-Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Jonatas Oliveira da SilvaLaboratório de Biotecnologia de Microrganismos, Universidade Federal de São João Del-Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Michelli Dos SantosLaboratório de Biotecnologia de Microrganismos, Universidade Federal de São João Del-Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Alessandra da Silva DantasSchool of Dental Sciences, Newcastle University, NewCastle upon Tyne, UK.
Mariana Campos da PazLaboratório de Bioativos & NanoBiotecnologia, Universidade Federal de São João Del-Rei, Sebastião Gonçalves Coelho, 400, 35501-296, Divinópolis, MG, Brazil.
Miguel Angel Chávez-FumagalliComputational Biology and Chemistry Research Group, Vicerrectorado de Investigación, Universidad Católica de Santa María, Urb. San José S/N, Umacollo, Arequipa 04000, Peru.
Rodolfo Cordeiro GiunchettiLaboratory of Cell-Cell Interactions, Institute of Biological Sciences, Department of Morphology, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 31270- 901, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Eduardo Antônio Ferraz CoelhoPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde: Infectologia e Medicina Tropical, Faculdade de Medicina,Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 30130-100, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Juliana Martins MachadoLaboratório de Biotecnologia de Microrganismos, Universidade Federal de São João Del-Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.
Alexsandro Sobreira GaldinoLaboratório de Biotecnologia de Microrganismos, Universidade Federal de São João Del-Rei, Divinópolis, 35501-296, MG, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMonkeypox is a global public health issue caused by the monkeypox virus (MPXV). As of October 28, 2022, a total of 77,115 laboratoryconfirmed cases and 3,610 probable cases, including 36 deaths, were reported, with 9,070 cases reported in Brazil, the second most affected country. The need to develop national technologies for the rapid diagnosis of emerging diseases for mass testing of the population is evident, as observed in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

objectiveWith that in mind, this article provides an overview of current methods, techniques, and their applications in the molecular detection of monkeypox, focusing the search on real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and polymerase chain reaction-enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (PCRELISA).

methodsThe relevant documents or papers covered in this study were selected by a search in international bibliographic databases. The search terms used in the databases were aimed at summarizing existing knowledge on molecular diagnostic methods, such as monkeypox; MPX, MPXV, qPCR, PCR, PCR-ELISA, diagnosis and detection searched separately or together using the Boolean operator "AND" either in the title or abstract. The searches took place in September 2022, and the corresponding articles were selected between 2012 and 2022.

resultsWe found 256 documents in total and twelve studies addressing the molecular diagnosis of monkeypox were classified as possible sources for this review.

conclusionIt is evident there is a pressing need to develop national technologies for rapid diagnosis of emerging diseases for mass testing of the population. It is also extremely important to have national detection kits with greater diagnostic capacity to assist in developing effective public policies in countries affected by this disease.

Indexed as

Molecular Diagnostic TechniquesMpox, MonkeypoxAnimalsCOVID-19Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHumansMonkeypox virusReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSARS-CoV-2detectiondiagnosismolecularMonkeypoxPCRqPCR.

Identifiers

PMID37461338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.