ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2024
An ELISA test using a circulating
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of a circulating pathogen-specific biomarker (polyketide synthetase 5, Pks5)-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) independently or in conjunction with a caudal fold tuberculin (CFT) test for bovine tuberculosis (bTB) screening in dairy cattle. We enrolled 987 dairy cows from 34 herds in Chiang Mai province, Thailand. A conditionally independent Bayesian model with a single population was inferred from the test results. The percentage of positive results for the Pks5-ELISA using 0.4 OD cutoff test and CFT test were 9.0% (89/987) and 10.5% (104/987), respectively. The median of posterior estimates of Se for the Pks5-ELISA test was 90.2% (95% posterior probability interval [PPI] = 76.6-97.4%), while the estimated Sp was slightly higher (median = 92.9, 95% PPI = 91.0-94.5%). The median estimated Se of the CFT test was 85.9% (95% PPI = 72.4-94.6%), while the estimated Sp was higher, with a median of 90.7% (95% PPI = 88.7-92.5%). The posterior estimate for true disease prevalence was 2.4% (95% PPI = 1.2-3.9%). The Pks5-ELISA test yielded characteristics at or above the acceptable standards for bTB detection. Therefore, the pathogen-specific biomarker, Pks5, is a potential detection system for bTB screening and may be applied as an ancillary test together with the currently applied standard method (CFT test) to reinforce the bTB control and eradication programs.
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.