Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9705391›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1998

Evaluation of the murex hybrid capture cytomegalovirus DNA assay versus plasma PCR and shell vial assay for diagnosis of human cytomegalovirus viremia in immunocompromised patients.

W Y Barrett-Muir, C Aitken, K Templeton, M Raftery, S M Kelsey, J Breuer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

W Y Barrett-MuirDepartment of Clinical Virology, Royal Hospitals NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom. W.Y.Barrett-Muir@mds.qmw.ac.uk
C Aitken
K Templeton
M Raftery
S M Kelsey
J Breuer
Pediatric Nephrology of Alabama · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We evaluated a cytomegalovirus (CMV) 24-hour shell vial assay (SVA), the Murex Hybrid Capture CMV DNA assay (HCA), and a CMV plasma PCR for the detection of CMV viremia in renal and bone marrow transplant recipients and human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. CMV viremia was detected by at least one method in 125 of 317 evaluable samples (39.4%) from 78 patients and was detected in 19.8% of samples by SVA, 26.8% by HCA, and 32.2% by plasma PCR. There was moderate to substantial agreement between the results of the different tests (kappa coefficient = 0.415 to 0.631). However, HCA and plasma PCR were significantly more sensitive than SVA (P = 0.001 and P < 0.0001, respectively; McNemar's test), and plasma PCR was more sensitive than HCA (P = 0.031; McNemar's test). HCA and plasma PCR were more consistently positive than SVA during viremic episodes (P = 0.0002 and P < 0.0001, respectively; McNemar's test). The use of HCA or plasma PCR may therefore improve the diagnosis and management of CMV disease in susceptible patient groups.

Indexed as

Immunocompromised HostAIDS-Related Opportunistic InfectionsBone Marrow TransplantationCytomegalovirusCytomegalovirus InfectionsDNA, ViralHumansKidney TransplantationNucleic Acid HybridizationPolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySerologic TestsViremiaDNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID9705391
PMCPMC105161
OpenAlexW2144652400

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.