ArticleHealth science reports2024
Evaluating the efficiency of ELISA, monoplex and multiplex probe-based real-time reverse-transcription PCR assays in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) and influenza A and B viruses: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background and Aims: The current study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) assay and monoplex and multiplex real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR) in the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and influenza A and B viruses (Flu A and Flu B). Methods: The SARS-CoV-2 -specific IgG and IgM antibodies, as well as, Flu A (H1N1 and H3N2 serotypes) and Flu B virus antibodies were determined by ELISA assay. The one-step qRT-PCR method was used to detect the SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples. Furthermore, the presence of Flu A and B viruses was evaluated using probe-based RT-PCR. Simultaneous detection of SARS-CoV-2, Flu A and B viruses was performed by multiplex rRT-PCR assay. Results: SARS CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies were detected in 33.3% and 58.3% of patients, respectively. In contrast, the SARS CoV-2 genome was detected in 50% of patients using the one-step monoplex RT-PCR assay. Flu A serotypes H1N1 and H3N2 were found in 16.7% and 8.3% of patients. Probe-based RT-PCR revealed that 39.3% of patients were positive for the Flu A virus. Multiplex rRT-PCR detect the SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, and Flu B in 50%, 39.3%, and 19% of samples, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of multiplex rRT-PCR assay in comparison to monoplex RT-PCR were 100% and 55%, respectively. Coinfection with SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, and Flu B viruses was found in 9.5% of patients. Conclusion: Multiplex rRT-PCR can be used as a repaid, cost-effective and suitable tool for molecular surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 and Flu A/B viruses.
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.