ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2026
Analytical comparison of two commercially available feline serum amyloid A assays using residual clinical plasma samples.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 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
Serum amyloid A (SAA) is a major acute-phase protein in cats; however, the agreement between commercially available feline SAA assays has not been fully evaluated. This study compared two analytical systems: the FUJI DRI-CHEM vf-SAA (sandwich fluorescence immunoassay) and VET-SAA Eiken (immunoturbidimetry). Eighty residual plasma samples from client-owned cats were analyzed. Methods were compared using Spearman's correlation, Passing-Bablok regression, and Bland-Altman percentage difference analysis. These assays revealed a strong association (Spearman's ρ=0.948). Passing-Bablok regression indicated proportional and constant bias (y=0.3325x + 1.155), and Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a large negative mean percent difference (-86.2%). These findings suggest that the results are not interchangeable and method-specific reference intervals may be required.
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.