ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
PCR standard curve quantification in an extensive wastewater surveillance program: results from the Dutch SARS-CoV-2 wastewater surveillance.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adaptable, quantitative CRISPR/Cas12a-based assay for cytomegalovirus DNA in infant saliva.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comprehensive wastewater genomic surveillance in the Netherlands: insights into country-wide SARS-CoV-2 lineage dynamics and implications for future surveillance.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The effects of RT-qPCR standards on reproducibility and comparability in monitoring SARS-CoV-2 levels in wastewater.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Wastewater-based epidemiology: deriving a SARS-CoV-2 data validation method to assess data quality and to improve trend recognition.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, wastewater surveillance programs were established, or upscaled, in many countries around the world and have proven to be a cost-effective way of monitoring infectious disease pathogens. Many of these programs use RT-qPCR, and quantify the viral concentrations in samples based on standard curves, by including preparations of a reference material with known nucleic acid or virus concentrations in the RT-qPCR analyses. In high-throughput monitoring programs it is possible to combine data from multiple previous runs, circumventing the need for duplication and resulting in decreased costs and prolonged periods during which the reference material is obtained from the same batch. However, over time, systematic shifts in standard curves are likely to occur. This would affect the reliability and usefulness of wastewater surveillance as a whole. We aim to find an optimal combination of standard curve data to compensate for run-to-run measurement variance while ensuring enough flexibility to capture systematic longitudinal shifts. Based on more than 4000 observations obtained with the CDC N1 and N2 assays, taken as a part of the National Sewage Surveillance program at the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, we show that seasonal and long-term shifts in RT-qPCR efficiency and sensitivity occur. We find that in our setting, using five days of standard-curve data to quantify, results in the least error prone curve or best approximation. This results in differences up to 100% in quantified viral loads when averaged out over a nationwide program of >300 treatment plants. Results show that combining standard curves from a limited set of runs can be a valid approach to quantification without obscuring the trends in the viral load of interest.
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.