ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2025
Comparison of qPCR methods for the diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis from granulomas collected at slaughterhouses.
Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To improve the direct diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in lesions from carcasses condemned at slaughterhouses - the primary method for identifying infected farms within the Surveillance System - two qPCR assays were evaluated against the gold standard: culture and identification of Mycobacterium bovis. A total of 167 lesion samples were collected by inspection services in Mato Grosso and Santa Catarina. Samples were homogenized and analyzed using culture and qPCR targeting the IS1081 sequence (for the M. tuberculosis complex) and the RD4 region (specific to M. bovis). Both qPCR assays demonstrated acceptable sensitivity and specificity, confirming the diagnostic value of these targets. The IS1081 qPCR showed a sensitivity of 0.80 [95% CI: 0.69-0.89] and specificity of 0.79 [95% CI: 0.70-0.87]. The RD4 qPCR yielded a sensitivity of 0.74 [95% CI: 0.61-0.84] and specificity of 0.84 [95% CI: 0.76-0.91]. Agreement between the two qPCR assays was high (K = 0.89 [95% CI: 0.82-0.96]). When using the parallel results of culture and IS1081 qPCR as gold standard, the RD4 assay achieved a sensitivity of 0.74 [95% CI: 0.64-0.83] and specificity of 1.00 [95% CI: 0.96-1.00]. In conclusion, both assays produced comparable results. The RD4 qPCR, due to its specificity for M. bovis, shows promise as a replacement for classical bacteriology and conventional PCR in bTB surveillance, offering operational advantages.
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.