ArticleVeterinary sciences2025
Antibody Titer Testing in Dogs: Evaluation of Three Point-of-Care Tests for Canine Core Vaccine Antigens Compared to Virus Neutralization.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Antibody titer testing can be useful in controlling successful puppy immunization and can reduce unnecessary vaccinations in adult dogs. We evaluated three commercially available point-of-care tests (POCTs) for detecting antibodies against canine parvovirus (CPV-2), canine distemper virus (CDV) and canine adenovirus (CAV-1 and/or -2), comparing them to the reference virus neutralization (VN) assay. Sera from 200 client-owned dogs (13 healthy, 63 chronically diseased, 124 acute) and 60 specific pathogen-free (SPF) dogs, including 20 sera with maternally derived antibodies (MDA), were tested. All three POCTs demonstrated high sensitivity (79.0-100%) and specificity (97.8-100%) for CPV-2. In contrast, specificity for CDV and CAV was lower with POCT-1 (43.5% and 55.3%) and POCT-2 (42.4% and 79.2%), despite high sensitivity (CDV in both POCTs 98.7%; CAV POCT-1: 99.4%, POCT-2: 90.8%). POCT-3, by comparison, showed high specificity (CDV: 94.1%; CAV: 84.4%) but very low sensitivity (CDV: 17.4%; CAV: 33.1%). Only POCT-1 for CPV-2 detected MDA reliably, whereas the other two POCTs, and POCT-1 for CDV and CAV, did not. When compared to VN, the agreement in vaccination recommendations was 82% for POCT-1 and POCT-2, and 62% for POCT-3. In conclusion, all three POCTs reliably detected antibodies against CPV-2, including MDA with POCT-1. However, the lower specificity for CDV and CAV antibody detection in POCT-1 and POCT-2 raises concerns about misclassifying unprotected dogs as immune, while false-negatives with POCT-3 could lead to unnecessary vaccinations. Further optimization of all three POCTs for CDV and CAV is recommended.
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.