About: Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : schema:ScholarlyArticle, within Data Space : covidontheweb.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	Academic Article research paper schema:ScholarlyArticle
isDefinedBy	Covid-on-the-Web dataset
has title	Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses
Creator	Edwards, Kathryn Lee, Wai-Ming Gebretsadik, Tebeb Pappas, Tressa Gern, James Griffin, Marie Williams, John Hartert, Tina Asad, S Miller, Kathryn
Source	Medline; PMC
abstract	BACKGROUND: Molecular polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based assays are increasingly used to diagnose viral respiratory infections and conduct epidemiology studies. Molecular assays have generally been evaluated by comparing them to conventional direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) or viral culture techniques, with few published direct comparisons between molecular methods or between institutions. We sought to perform a real-world comparison of two molecular respiratory viral diagnostic methods between two experienced respiratory virus research laboratories. METHODS: We tested nasal and throat swab specimens obtained from 225 infants with respiratory illness for 11 common respiratory viruses using both a multiplex assay (Respiratory MultiCode-PLx Assay [RMA]) and individual real-time RT-PCR (RT-rtPCR). RESULTS: Both assays detected viruses in more than 70% of specimens, but there was discordance. The RMA assay detected significantly more human metapneumovirus (HMPV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), while RT-rtPCR detected significantly more influenza A. We speculated that primer differences accounted for these discrepancies and redesigned the primers and probes for influenza A in the RMA assay, and for HMPV and RSV in the RT-rtPCR assay. The tests were then repeated and again compared. The new primers led to improved detection of HMPV and RSV by RT-rtPCR assay, but the RMA assay remained similar in terms of influenza detection. CONCLUSIONS: Given the absence of a gold standard, clinical and research laboratories should regularly correlate the results of molecular assays with other PCR based assays, other laboratories, and with standard virologic methods to ensure consistency and accuracy.
has issue date	2011-06-29(xsd:dateTime)
bibo:doi	10.1186/1743-422x-8-332
bibo:pmid	21714915
has license	cc-by
sha1sum (hex)	0a0cbd4cb08c862deadcb5aaef22a27b770c0791
schema:url	https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-422x-8-332
resource representing a document's title	Real-world comparison of two molecular methods for detection of respiratory viruses
has PubMed Central identifier	PMC3154182
has PubMed identifier	21714915
schema:publication	Virol J
resource representing a document's body	covid:0a0cbd4cb08c862deadcb5aaef22a27b770c0791#body_text
is schema:about of	named entity 'based' named entity 'respiratory' named entity 'viral' named entity 'individual' named entity 'viruses' named entity 'PUBLISHED' named entity 'EXPERIENCED' named entity 'VIRAL CULTURE' named entity 'METHODS' named entity 'WORLD' named entity 'CONVENTIONAL' named entity 'RTPCR' named entity 'USED' named entity 'COMMON' named entity 'BASED' named entity 'FLUORESCENT ANTIBODY' named entity 'REAL' named entity 'COMPARISON' named entity 'REAL' named entity '225' named entity 'DIRECT' named entity 'HAVE' named entity 'USING' named entity 'RESEARCH LABORATORIES' named entity 'WORLD' named entity 'DETECTION' named entity 'MOLECULAR' named entity 'BACKGROUND' named entity 'DIAGNOSTIC' named entity 'RESPIRATORY' named entity 'RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS' named entity 'RESPIRATORY VIRUS' named entity 'RESPIRATORY ILLNESS' named entity 'METHODS' named entity 'MOLECULAR' named entity 'EPIDEMIOLOGY' named entity 'VIRAL' named entity 'CONDUCT' named entity 'PERFORM' named entity 'INFANTS' named entity 'RESPIRATORY VIRUSES' named entity 'CULTURE TECHNIQUES' named entity 'INDIVIDUAL' named entity 'SPECIMENS' named entity 'OBTAINED' named entity 'REAL-TIME RT-PCR' named entity 'COMPARISON' named entity 'MULTIPLEX ASSAY' named entity 'DIAGNOSE' named entity 'GENERALLY' named entity 'EVALUATED' named entity 'TESTED' named entity 'POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION' named entity 'NASAL AND THROAT SWAB' named entity 'STUDIES' named entity 'RESPIRATORY VIRUSES' named entity 'COMPARING' named entity 'ASSAY' named entity 'INSTITUTIONS' covid:arg/0a0cbd4cb08c862deadcb5aaef22a27b770c0791 named entity 'tested' named entity 'multiplex' named entity 'direct fluorescent antibody' named entity 'viral culture' named entity 'direct fluorescent antibody' named entity 'viruses' named entity 'viral culture' named entity 'DFA' named entity 'false positives' named entity 'HRV' named entity 'RSV' named entity 'RSV'

Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020

Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software