ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2025
Analytical comparison of three canine C-reactive protein assays in clinical use in Japan.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
C-reactive protein (CRP) is a key biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis in dogs. Accurate and consistent CRP measurements are essential for clinical decision-making. In Japan, different CRP measurement systems are commonly used, but their compatibility has not been validated. In this study, we evaluated the correlation and agreement among three CRP assay systems (immunonephelometry, immunoturbidimetry, and dry chemistry) using 138 dog plasma samples. Strong correlations (r >0.9) were observed, but regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots revealed systematic errors, indicating that these systems are not interchangeable. These findings highlight the need for system-specific reference ranges and clinical decision thresholds and suggest that a common calibration agent could enhance comparability and support the standardization of CRP measurements in veterinary medicine.
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.