ArticleBMC veterinary research2025
Establishment and application of a droplet digital PCR assay for sensitive detection of porcine deltacoronavirus.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPorcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) is a newly emerging coronavirus that causes severe diarrhea and dehydration in newborn piglets, and can infect multiple animal species including humans, posing a substantial threat to global swine production and human health. To address these challenges, we developed a droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) method for detecting the N gene of PDCoV in clinical samples.
resultsOur ddPCR method exhibited good linearity, reproducibility, and repeatability. In comparison to conventional quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), the ddPCR assay demonstrated exceptional sensitivity, with limits of detection (LoD) of 1.65 copies/reaction (95% CI: 1.39–2.14) for clinical sample and 1.62 copies/reaction (95% CI: 1.36–2.12) for standard plasmid, respectively. Besides, the ddPCR assay displayed no cross-reactivity with the other 6 common swine pathogens. The results of clinical sample testing showed that the positivity rate of ddPCR (29/182) was greater than that of qPCR (25/182), with a coincidence rate of 97.80%.
conclusionsThe established ddPCR method exhibits good sensitivity, repeatability, and specificity, indicating that this method can be used as a promising tool for the sensitive detection and quantification of PDCoV.
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.