ArticleBMC microbiology2026
Validation of a multiplex qRT-PCR assay for the detection of RSV, influenza A/B virus and SARS-CoV-2.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2026. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The significant burden of viral respiratory diseases necessitates rapid detection of key pathogens. Simultaneous testing for SARS-CoV-2, RSV, and influenza A/B as an initial step, followed by broader panels as needed, offers a cost-effective diagnostic strategy. This study aimed to validate a new commercial multiplex qRT-PCR assay (Diagnovital® RTA Laboratories, Turkey) for the simultaneous detection of these viruses.Analytical sensitivity was determined using Probit regression analysis on serial dilutions (10⁵–10¹ copies/ml) for each target virus. Specificity was evaluated with 120 negative samples and 32 positive samples for non-target respiratory viruses. External quality control panels and clinical specimens positive for RSV (n = 39), influenza A/B (n = 71), SARS-CoV-2 (n = 64) were used for accuracy testing. Intra- and inter-assay precision were analyzed using samples near the limit of detection. The performance was compared to routine diagnostic tests.The assay’s analytical sensitivity was 420.7, 296.7, 368.6, 1362.6, and 1459.7 copies/ml for SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Omicron variants, influenza A, influenza B, and RSV, respectively. Analytical specificity was 100%, and precision showed CV% < 5. Detection rates for SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and RSV were 100%, 95.1%, 97.5%, and 94.8%, respectively, with false negatives occurring in samples with Ct > 33. Comparative analysis showed high correlations between assays, with strong agreement (Cohen’s κ ranging from 0.861 to 1).These findings demonstrate the clinical applicability of the Diagnovital® assay, though false negatives may occur in low-concentration samples.
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.