ArticleVaccines2025
The Validation of a Hemagglutination Inhibition Assay That Detects Antibodies Against a Newcastle Disease Virus-Based Vaccine Vector in Human Serum Samples.
Article in Vaccines, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn NDV-based vector has been used as a veterinary vaccine and, recently, as a human COVID-19 vaccine. However, data for the potential immune response against the vector in humans are scarce; therefore, it is important to evaluate the levels of antibodies produced. The HI assay is the gold standard for assessing the humoral response against NDV in poultry serum.
objectiveHere, the objective was to validate the HI assay against the NDV-vectored vaccine to analyze antibodies in human serum.
methodsFirst, we standardized the conditions in human sera before validation.
resultsThe results for analytical performance in terms of selectivity, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, as well as positive and negative diagnostic reliability, indicate that the assay is highly selective, allowing clear discrimination between positive and negative samples. Regarding repeatability and intermediate precision, we demonstrated that the assay has the precision to obtain consistent results, guaranteeing their reliability and truthfulness. Finally, the results regarding accuracy, linearity, and robustness indicate that the assay is accurate across the evaluated concentration intervals, with a linear correlation between low and high levels, and demonstrate that it is robust and consistent when serum-antigen interaction times are changed.
conclusionsWe conclude that the suitability of the analytical method for its intended use is confirmed, guaranteeing the reliability of the results obtained under the established operating conditions.
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.