ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026
Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of metagenomic sequencing and qPCR for detection of viruses associated with bovine respiratory disease estimated using Bayesian latent class models.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of short nasal swab and deep nasopharyngeal swab sampling methods to describe BRD-associated viruses and bacteria detected using a metagenomics approach optimized for virus recovery in fall-placed beef calves shortly after feedlot arrival.Veterinary and animal science · 2026Article
- Laboratory tests for bovine respiratory bacteria and antimicrobial resistance in commercial feedlot cattle: comparing culture, long-read metagenomics, and recombinase polymerase amplification.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Prevalences of respiratory viruses and bacteria in Western Canadian commercial feedlot calves detected using a single metagenomic sequencing protocol vary during the first two weeks of arrival and by age group.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Very few studies have examined the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of currently available laboratory tests for detecting respiratory pathogens in cattle, and even fewer have examined test performance on samples from animals before the onset of clinical disease. Methods: In this study, Bayesian latent class modeling (BLCM) was used to assess diagnostic test performance in the absence of a gold standard on nasal swabs collected from 19 western Canadian feedlots. Viruses associated with bovine respiratory disease (BRD) were identified using qPCR from a commercial diagnostic laboratory from 760 nasal swabs collected from fall-placed calves (FPC) and yearlings (YRL) at and shortly after feedlot arrival. Using BLCM, the qPCR results were compared to previously reported matching nanopore metagenomic sequencing data for these same samples. Based on BLCM, test sensitivities and specificities were estimated for the detection of bovine coronavirus (BCoV), bovine herpesvirus type 1 (BoHV-1), bovine parainfluenza virus type 3 (BPIV-3), bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV), and influenza D virus (IDV). Estimates informed by BLCM were not available for the detection of bovine viral diarrheal virus (BVDV) because qPCR did not detect this virus in any samples. Results: Diagnostic sensitivity of qPCR was higher than metagenomic sequencing for detecting BCoV (qPCR 0.90, 95% CrI 0.81-0.99; sequencing 0.35, 95% CrI 0.25-0.46) and BoHV-1 (qPCR 0.39, 95% CrI 0.19-0.99; sequencing 0.04, 95% CrI 0.01-0.15). However, the estimated diagnostic sensitivity of metagenomic sequencing was higher than qPCR for identifying BRSV (qPCR 0.32, 95% CrI 0.22-0.43; sequencing 0.60, 95% CrI 0.44-0.77). No significant difference among sensitivities was noted for the detection of BPIV-3 (qPCR 0.42, 95% CrI 0.21-0.66; sequencing 0.52, 95% CrI 0.19-0.87) and IDV (qPCR 0.65, 95% CrI 0.53-0.79; sequencing 0.60, 95% CrI 0.48-0.73). Diagnostic specificity was comparable for most viruses, except for BCoV, where metagenomic sequencing (BCoV 0.91, 95% CrI 0.88-0.95) outperformed qPCR (BCoV 0.59, 95% CrI 0.51-0.68). The specificity and sensitivity for detection of BRD-associated bacteria from the same metagenomic data were also similar to those estimated for culture and qPCR results for the same samples. Discussion: Estimated test sensitivities of both nanopore metagenomic sequencing and qPCR for the detection of BRD viruses of interest in nasal swab samples were moderate to very low for most viruses. While the tests varied in their ability to detect individual viruses, data from this study suggest nanopore metagenomic sequencing offers a potential alternative for diagnostic laboratories to identify three of six important BRD viruses as well as bacteria associated with BRD.
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.