ArticleScientific reports2024
The effects of RT-qPCR standards on reproducibility and comparability in monitoring SARS-CoV-2 levels in wastewater.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The good, the bad, and the stable: Reference genes for preclinical biodistribution studies.Molecular therapy. Advances · 2026Article
- The effects of anabolic-androgenic steroid use and training style on myogenic expression in trained male iron sport athletes.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
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
Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) is widely used for monitoring viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in wastewater. Various materials, including plasmid DNA, synthetic nucleic acids, PCR amplicons, genomic DNA, and cDNA, are currently used for SARS-CoV-2 quantification by generating standard curves. We assessed three common standards on quantifying SARS-CoV-2 RNA across nine wastewater treatment plants in Finland, as part of the national wastewater surveillance effort. We pairwise compared RT-qPCR results from 148 wastewater samples, using both IDT (#10006625, IDT, USA) and CODEX standards (#SC2-RNAC-1100, CODEX DNA), and 179 samples using both IDT and EURM019 standards (#EURM-019, European Commission, Joint Research Centre) in our assessment. Amongst the tested standards, the CODEX standard consistently yielded more stable results than either the IDT or EURM019 standards. We found that SARS-CoV-2 levels were higher with the IDT standard (4.36 Log
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.