ArticlePloS one2024
Comparison of immunological and molecular methods for laboratory diagnosis of ocular toxoplasmosis in blood, serum and tears in Brazil.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness of congenital toxoplasmosis treatment in minimizing hearing loss: A systematic review.Science progressPooled it
- Molecular Epidemiology ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy for Human Toxoplasmosis: Performance, Populations, and Validation Gaps.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Mooren's ulcer: a multifactorial autoimmune peripheral ulcerative keratitis and current treatment protocols.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ocular toxoplasmosis (OT) is caused by protozoan T. gondii. Ophthalmological examination is considered the gold standard for OT diagnosis, and laboratory tests are used for diagnostic confirmation. However, these tests can present different results, which change depending on their basis, on sample type and on patients' clinical alteration. Thus, the aim of the present study is to assess immunodiagnostic and molecular techniques applied in blood, serum and tear fluid to diagnose T. gondii infection in patients seen at an Ophthalmology Clinic. In total, 160 patients were included in the study, 40 of them had OT with active lesions (G1); 40 had OT with healed lesions (G2), 40 had non-toxoplasmic uveitis (G3) and 40 had no ocular alterations (G4). Serum samples were subjected to Immunoenzymatic Assay (ELISA) and to Indirect Immunofluorescence Reaction (IFAT) to search for anti-T. gondii IgM and IgG. Tear fluid samples were analyzed through ELISA for IgA research. All blood and tear fluid samples were subjected to conventional polymerase chain reaction (cPCR) and in a Nested PCR model for T. gondii DNA amplification with targets B1, GRA7 and REP 529. IgG and IgM anti-T. gondii was detected in serum samples from 106 and 15 patients, respectively, when combining ELISA and IFAT results. Anti-T.gondii IgA antibodies were detected in 9.2% of the tear material. Nested PCR with GRA7 target showed higher positivity in blood samples (24.4%); Nested PCR with B1 target showed a higher frequency of positivity in tears (15%). Biological samples of patients with active lesions showed the highest positivity frequencies in all immunodiagnostic assays, as well as in most PCR models. The present results highlighted the need of associating techniques with different fundamentals to confirm OT diagnosis. Furthermore, further tear fluid analyses should be performed to validate this biological material as lesser invasive alternative for the more accurate OT diagnosis.
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.