Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38456695›Full record

ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2024

Comprehensive evaluation of nucleic acid amplification methods widely used for generic detection of sandfly-borne phleboviruses.

Ceylan Polat, Nazli Ayhan, Koray Ergünay, Remi N Charrel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Ceylan PolatDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-1511-4177
Nazli AyhanUnité des Virus Emergents, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4979-6794
Koray ErgünayDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Remi N CharrelUnité des Virus Emergents, Aix Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Aix-Marseille Université · FRInserm · FRSmithsonian Institution · US

Funding

EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (H2020) 871029European Commission (EC) 101057690UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) 10038150, 10039289
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sandfly-borne phleboviruses (SBPs), which cause sandfly fever, aseptic meningitis, encephalitis, and meningoencephalitis, are emerging pathogens of major public health concern. Virus nucleic acid testing is essential for SBP diagnosis, especially in the early stages of infection, and for the discovery of novel SBPs. The efficacy of utilizing generic primers that target conserved nucleotide sequences for the detection of both known and novel SBPs has not been extensively evaluated. We aimed to compare and evaluate the performance of five generic primer sets, widely used to detect S- and L-segments of arthropod-borne phleboviruses and designed as singleplex ( IMPORTANCE: Virus nucleic acid testing is the primary diagnostic method, particularly in the early stages of illness. Virus-specific or syndromic tests are widely used for this purpose. The use of generic primers has had a considerable impact on the discovery, identification, and detection of Old World sandfly-borne phleboviruses (OWSBP). The study is significant because it is the first to carry out a comparative evaluation of all published OWSBP generic primer sets.

Indexed as

Nucleic AcidsPhlebovirusPsychodidaeAnimalsNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesPhylogenyNucleic Acidsarbovirusin silicophlebovirusRT-PCR assaysand fly

Identifiers

PMID38456695
PMCPMC10986501
OpenAlexW4392586039

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.