ArticleViruses2025
Droplet Digital PCR or Real-Time PCR as a Method for Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Plasma-Is There a Difference?
Article in Viruses, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Detection of Norovirus from Berries in Serbia by Digital PCR and NGS.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study is to ascertain whether qRT-PCR (reverse transcriptase real-time PCR) or RT-ddPCR (reverse transcriptase digital droplet PCR) is more effective for detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA) in blood plasma from COVID-19 (coronavirus infectious disease-19) patients. The E-gene of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was quantified using both methods in 128 plasma samples from 70 hospitalized patients, followed by a statistical analysis to compare the sensitivity and concordance between the methods. Out of the 128 samples, 89 yielded consistent results irrespective of the method used, whereas 39 samples showed discrepancies between the two different methods. RT-ddPCR frequently registered higher viral quantities compared to qRT-PCR; however, the results did not demonstrate a clear superiority in sensitivity for RT-ddPCR. Although RT-ddPCR registered higher viral quantities, this study concludes that both methods provide comparable results for detecting SARS-CoV-2 E-gene RNA in plasma.
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.