Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38258006›Full record

ArticleMicroorganisms2024

A Comparative Analysis of Molecular Biological Methods for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Testing the In Vitro Infectivity of the Virus.

Kalina Shishkova, Bilyana Sirakova, Stoyan Shishkov, Eliya Stoilova, Hristiyan Mladenov, Ivo Sirakov

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microorganisms, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Antiviral Activity of Water-Alcoholic Extract ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kalina ShishkovaLaboratory of Virology, Faculty of Biology, University of Sofia "St. Kl. Ohridski", 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria.
Bilyana SirakovaFaculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University of Sofia, 1431 Sofia, Bulgaria.
Stoyan ShishkovLaboratory of Virology, Faculty of Biology, University of Sofia "St. Kl. Ohridski", 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-8203-3812
Eliya StoilovaLaboratory of Virology, Faculty of Biology, University of Sofia "St. Kl. Ohridski", 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria.
Hristiyan MladenovDiagnostic Consulting Center 14, 1408 Sofia, Bulgaria.
Ivo SirakovDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Medical Faculty, Medical University of Sofia, 1431 Sofia, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-4765-3231
Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski" · BGMedical University of Sofia · BG

Funding

Medical University of Sofia №8255/23.11.2022 , D-209/03.08.2023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The virus discovered in 2019 in the city of Wuhan, China, which was later identified as SARS-CoV-2 and which spread to the level of a pandemic, put diagnostic methods to the test. Early in the pandemic, we developed a nested PCR assay for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, which we validated and applied to detect the virus in feline samples. The present study describes the application of the nested PCR test in parallel with LAMP for the detection of the virus in 427 nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal human samples taken between October 2020 and January 2022. Of the swabs tested, there were 43 positives, accounting for 10.1% of all samples tested, with the negatives numbering 382, i.e., 89.5%, and there were 2 (0.4%) invalid ones. The nPCR results confirmed those obtained by using LAMP, with results concordant in both methods. Nasal swabs tested using nPCR confirmed the results of oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swab samples tested using LAMP and nPCR. The focus of the discussion is on the two techniques: the actual practical application of the laboratory-developed assays and the diagnostic value of nasal samples. The nPCR used is a reliable and sensitive technique for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, and nasal swab samples. However, it has some disadvantages related to the duration of the entire process, as well as a risk of contamination. Experiments were performed to demonstrate the infectivity of the virus from the positive isolates in vitro. A discrepancy was reported between direct and indirect methods of testing the virus and accounting for its ability to cause infection in vitro.

Indexed as

diagnosticIVDRLAMPnasal swabsnested PCRSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID38258006
PMCPMC10819592
OpenAlexW4390948216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.