ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2026
Comparative evaluation of commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits for antibody monitoring of classical swine fever virus in Japanese pig herds: performance assessment of domestic and foreign kits.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Classical swine fever (CSF) is a highly contagious disease in pigs, and vaccination with antibody monitoring is critical for its prevention. In this study, the effectiveness of two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits for antibody detection against CSF virus (CSFV)-an indirect ELISA kit authorized in Japan in 2001 (N-kit) and a competitive ELISA kit additionally authorized in 2024 (I-kit)-was compared. For each ELISA kit, detection accuracy in terms of sensitivity, specificity and agreement rate, and quantitative accuracy were evaluated based on neutralizing antibody titers determined by serum neutralization tests. In addition, the impact of serum heat-inactivation at 56°C for 30 min on ELISA results was assessed. The results indicated that the I-kit showed the highest sensitivity and agreement rate in detection accuracy, whereas the N-kit showed the highest quantitative accuracy. Although blocking rates of the I-kit increased after heat-inactivation, high correlation rates between treated and untreated samples were confirmed for both kits, suggesting that heat-inactivation does not affect the final interpretation of the test results. These findings demonstrated that the I-kit is suitable for initial antibody screening in pigs due to its higher sensitivity, whereas the N-kit provides better quantitative accuracy, making it preferable for measuring antibody titers in sows. Therefore, the selection of an appropriate ELISA kit according to the purpose of antibody detection is necessary to ensure a more accurate evaluation of the effects of CSFV vaccination on preventing CSF in pig herds.
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.