Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42129071›Full record

ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026

Proteomics in the Diagnosis of Viral and Pathogenic Infections.

Timothy Daniel Veenstra

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Timothy Daniel VeenstraCollege of Medicine, Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Bradenton, FL, USA. tveenstra@lecom.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While this book's theme is proteomics and virology, this chapter on the role of proteomics in clinical virology may seem unsatisfying to the reader. The reason is simple: proteomics has not made a major impact on the diagnosing of viral infections. However, it is still important to evaluate the present role of proteomics in clinical virology as it provides a vision of what is required if it is to ever have a major impact in diagnosing viral infections. This chapter will initially provide a background on current techniques for diagnosing viral infections. Although the names may not be familiar to the casual reader, the techniques will be as most individuals have been tested using one of these techniques during their lifetime. The chapter will later switch to describe proteomic methods for the direct detection of viruses in clinical samples. While outside the scope of this book, a proteomic method for bacterial identification is included because (i) it describes a proteomic technology that has been approved by the FDA for clinical use and (ii) since viruses and bacteria are both infectious agents it demonstrates the potential of proteomics for overall pathogen detection. To keep the topic in perspective, however, the advantages and disadvantages of using proteomics in clinical virology are compared to current existing methods particularly those that target the detection of genomic features within these pathogens.

Indexed as

ProteomicsVirus DiseasesVirusesHumansAntivirus antibodiesantibodiesClinical bacteriologyClinical virologyclinical virologyCytopathicDiagnosisdiagnosisEnzyme-linked immunosorbent assayImmunoassaysMicroarraysMultiple reaction monitoring mass spectrometrymass spectrometryNucleic acid amplification test

Identifiers

PMID42129071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.