ArticlePloS one2024
Monitoring emerging pathogens using negative nucleic acid test results from endemic pathogens in pig populations: Application to porcine enteric coronaviruses.
Article in PloS one, 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
36 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the use of endemic enteric coronaviruses polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-negative testing results as an alternative approach to detect the emergence of animal health threats with similar clinical diseases presentation. This retrospective study, conducted in the United States, used PCR-negative testing results from porcine samples tested at six veterinary diagnostic laboratories. As a proof of concept, the database was first searched for transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) negative submissions between January 1st, 2010, through April 29th, 2013, when the first porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) case was diagnosed. Secondly, TGEV- and PEDV-negative submissions were used to detect the porcine delta coronavirus (PDCoV) emergence in 2014. Lastly, encountered best detection algorithms were implemented to prospectively monitor the 2023 enteric coronavirus-negative submissions. Time series (weekly TGEV-negative counts) and Seasonal Autoregressive-Integrated Moving-Average (SARIMA) were used to control for outliers, trends, and seasonality. The SARIMA's fitted and residuals were then subjected to anomaly detection algorithms (EARS, EWMA, CUSUM, Farrington) to identify alarms, defined as weeks of higher TGEV-negativity than what was predicted by models preceding the PEDV emergence. The best-performing detection algorithms had the lowest false alarms (number of alarms detected during the baseline) and highest time to detect (number of weeks between the first alarm and PEDV emergence). The best-performing detection algorithms were CUSUM, EWMA, and Farrington flexible using SARIMA fitted values, having a lower false alarm rate and identified alarms 4 to 17 weeks before PEDV and PDCoV emergences. No alarms were identified in the 2023 enteric negative testing results. The negative-based monitoring system functioned in the case of PEDV propagating epidemic and in the presence of a concurrent propagating epidemic with the PDCoV emergence. It demonstrated its applicability as an additional tool for diagnostic data monitoring of emergent pathogens having similar clinical disease as the monitored endemic pathogens.
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.