ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Assessment of the impact of different SARS-CoV-2 inactivation operations on colistin sulfate plasma concentration results.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effects of different SARS-CoV-2 inactivation methods on the blood concentration of colistin sulfate.
methodsA colistin sulfate reference substance, a quality control plasma sample, and a clinically measured sample were transferred and heated in a 56 °C water batch for 30 min or irradiated under an ultraviolet (UV) lamp for 60 min to examine the stability of the reference solution and quality control plasma sample. Statistical analysis was conducted for the concentration of the clinically measured sample before and after inactivation with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) method, the Passing-Bablok regression, and the Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsThe reference substance of colistin sulfate was unstable under UV inactivation. Under moist heat inactivation, the reference substance and quality control plasma sample of colistin sulfate were stable. The ICC of the concentration results of 27 clinical blood samples with and without moist heat inactivation was 0.995 (P < 0.001). The Passing-Bablok regression equation was Y = 0.01347 + 0.9861X (R
conclusionThe clinical plasma concentration test samples for colistin sulfate can be processed with the moist heat virus inactivation method to reduce the risk of virus infection of medical staff.
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.