Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39599835›Full record

ArticleViruses2024

Droplet Digital PCR Enhances Sensitivity of Canine Distemper Virus Detection.

Victoria Iribarnegaray, Guillermo Godiño, Camila Larrañaga, Kanji Yamasaki, José Manuel Verdes, Rodrigo Puentes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Viruses, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Investigation of the canine distemper virus in dogs living at public kennels in Northern Brazil: validation of a detection assay.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Victoria IribarnegarayMicrobiology Unit, Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de la República (Udelar), Route 8 Km 18, Montevideo 13000, Uruguay.ORCID 0000-0002-0245-9152
Guillermo GodiñoPathology Unit, Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de la República (Udelar), Route 8 Km 18, Montevideo 13000, Uruguay.
Camila LarrañagaPathology Unit, Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de la República (Udelar), Route 8 Km 18, Montevideo 13000, Uruguay.
Kanji YamasakiPathology Unit, Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de la República (Udelar), Route 8 Km 18, Montevideo 13000, Uruguay.
José Manuel VerdesPathology Unit, Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de la República (Udelar), Route 8 Km 18, Montevideo 13000, Uruguay.
Rodrigo PuentesMicrobiology Unit, Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidad de la República (Udelar), Route 8 Km 18, Montevideo 13000, Uruguay.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Canine distemper virus (CDV) poses a substantial threat to diverse carnivorans, leading to systemic and often fatal diseases. Accurate and prompt diagnosis is paramount for effective management and curbing further transmission. This study evaluates the diagnostic performance of droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in comparison to conventional reverse-transcription (RT-PCR) and quantitative reverse-transcription real-time PCR (RT-qPCR). Seventy-six clinical samples were collected from dogs with CDV symptoms diagnosed by specialized veterinarians, and sixteen samples from apparently healthy individuals. Conventional PCR, quantitative real-time PCR, and ddPCR were deployed, and their diagnostic capabilities were meticulously assessed. DdPCR exhibited heightened analytical sensitivity, reaching a detection limit of 3 copies/μL, whereas RT-qPCR had a detection limit of 86 copies/μL. The comparative analysis between clinical diagnosis and molecular techniques, including RT-PCR and RT-qPCR, demonstrated low concordance, with Kappa coefficients of 0.268 and 0.324, respectively. In contrast, ddPCR showed a moderate concordance, with a Kappa coefficient of 0.477. The sensitivity was 42.4% for RT-PCR, 57.9% for RT-qPCR, and 72.4% for ddPCR, with 100% specificity for all methods. This study underscores ddPCR's superior sensitivity and agreement with clinical CDV diagnosis, even at low viral concentrations, suggesting it as a promising alternative for CDV diagnosis.

Indexed as

DistemperDistemper Virus, CanineSensitivity and SpecificityAnimalsDogsPolymerase Chain ReactionReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionRNA, ViralRNA, Viralcanine distemper virusdroplet digital PCRmolecular diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID39599835
PMCPMC11598849

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.