ArticleScientific reports2025
Establishment and validation of a simple and accurate qPCR detection method for Haemophilus parasuis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As an infectious disease that poses a significant threat to the rapidly growing pig breeding industry, the detection of Haemophilus parasuis (HPS) is often compromised by various interfering substances present in the test sample during quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). The rapid detection of HPS is important for the isolation of infectious pigs and their treatment. We designed and optimized a rapid qPCR test to detect the INFB gene of HPS in clinical and environmental samples on pig farms. The method was evaluated for its specificity, sensitivity, repeatability, anti-interference capability, and its ability to detect HPS in clinical samples. The results indicated that the method was specific for the detection of HPS when evaluated against pathogens and intestinal probiotics found in pig farms. By using a seven-fold dilution series of the recombinant plasmid DNA in triplicate, it was determined that the lowest limit of detection (LOD) for this method was less than 10 copies/µL. The results of inter-batch and intra-batch repeatability tests showed that the coefficient of variation (CV) was consistently below 1%. Furthermore, the impact of 14 endogenous and exogenous interfering substances on the Ct values detected by the HPS qPCR was found to be less than 5% when compared to the Ct values obtained in the absence of interfering substances. A total of 248 clinical samples were analyzed using the HPS qPCR, commercial kits, and corresponding national standards, yielding positive rates of 9.27%, 6.05%, and 9.27%, respectively. Notably, the positive and negative percent agreement between the detection method developed in this research and the national standard was 100%. These findings demonstrate that the established detection method is suitable for epidemiological research on HPS and for diagnosing clinical samples containing interfering substances, thereby providing essential technical support for the prevention and control of HPS.
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.