ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2026
Comparison of nucleic acid testing and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in screening Hepatitis-B Virus in blood samples.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the value of nucleic acid testing (NAT) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in the screening of Hepatitis-B virus (HBV) in blood samples from voluntary blood donors. Methodology: This was a retrospective observational study. Five hundred blood samples from healthy blood donors collected by the Baoding No.1 Central Hospital between from January, 2024 to January, 2025 were selected as the study subjects, and each sample was divided into two groups, one for HBV NAT and the other for ELISA. Afterward, based on the diagnostic results of the gold label test paper, the diagnostic efficacy of two detection methods for HBV was compared using sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, compared their respective window periods for HBV using t-test. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of HBV NAT were higher than those of ELISA, and the window phase for NAT of the virus was shorter than that of ELISA (p < 0.05). The HBV-DNA levels were significantly different between patients with HBsAg (+)/HBeAg (+)/Anti-HBc (+), HBsAg(+)/Anti-HBe(+)/Anti-HBc (+), and infection (p=0.00), showing a positive correlation with disease severity (r =0.73, p = <0.001). Conclusion: NAT may significantly improve the specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of HBV detection in blood samples from voluntary blood donors, with a shorter window phase than ELISA, which can better ensure blood safety.
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.