ArticlePloS one2026
Isothermal real-time RT-RPA for Machupo virus detection: Field-adaptable sensitivity comparable with laboratory PCR.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Isothermal nucleic acid amplification methods, such as recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA), are becoming increasingly vital as diagnostic platforms for neglected tropical diseases by enabling rapid and accurate detection in under-resourced regions. We developed a real-time RT-RPA assay for Machupo virus (MACV), the causative agent of Bolivian hemorrhagic fever, and directly compared it to a real-time RT-PCR assay targeting the same viral sequence fragment. The methods were evaluated across critical parameters: limit of detection (LOD), tolerance to single-nucleotide substitutions, multiplexing capability, and adaptability to multiple MACV genetic variants. The LOD was identical for both assays: 5 × 103 copies/ml of armored RNA particles. They differed in terms of input RNA (copies/reaction): 100 (PCR) versus 20 (RPA). The real-time RT-RPA assay was further validated on a portable device, demonstrating its potential for field-deployability for point-of-care applications.
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.