↓ Skip to main content

Estimation of the sensitivity and specificity of two serum ELISAs and one fecal qPCR for diagnosis of paratuberculosis in sub-clinically infected young-adult French sheep using latent class Bayesian…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Estimation of the sensitivity and specificity of two serum ELISAs and one fecal qPCR for diagnosis of paratuberculosis in sub-clinically infected young-adult French sheep using latent class Bayesian modeling
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12917-017-1145-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoann Mathevon, Gilles Foucras, Rémy Falguières, Fabien Corbiere

Abstract

The objective was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of two serum ELISAs and one quantitative PCR on feces for the diagnosis of paratuberculosis in sub-clinically infected young-adult sheep. A cross-sectional study was performed to collect 1197 individual blood and fecal samples from 2- to 3-year-old sub-clinically infected ewes in 14 closed meat sheep flocks in France. Fecal excretion was determined using qPCR based on IS900 sequence detection, and serology was performed on serum samples using two commercial ELISAs. Data were analyzed in a 3-test multiple-population Bayesian latent class model accounting for potential dependence between the three tests fitted in OpenBUGS. Separate analyses were performed according to whether doubtful ELISA results were handled as positive or negative and based on two thresholds for fecal qPCR (Ct ≤ 42 or Ct ≤ 40). The best fit to the data was provided by accounting for a pairwise dependence between the two ELISAs on sensitivity and pairwise dependence between the three tests on specificity. Under this model, the estimated ELISA sensitivities were 17.4% (95% PCI: 10.6 - 25.9) and 17.9% (95% PCI 11.4 - 25.6), with estimated specificities of 94.8% (95% PCI: 93.1 - 96.3) and 94.0% (95% PCI: 92.2 - 95.7). Fecal qPCR demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity (47.5%; 95% PCI: 29.3 - 69.9) and specificity (99.0%; 95% PCI: 97.9 - 99.9) than the ELISAs. Assumptions regarding doubtful ELISA results and qPCR thresholds had only a slight impact on test accuracy estimates. Models not accounting for pairwise dependence between ELISA and fecal qPCR results yielded higher sensitivity and specificity estimates but always provided a worse fit to the data. Although the overall sensitivity of serum ELISAs and fecal qPCR remains low, the higher diagnostic performances of fecal qPCR make it more suitable for paratuberculosis diagnosis in sub-clinically infected sheep. Our results also illustrate that all dependence structures should be investigated when evaluating diagnostic test accuracy and selection based on a rigorous statistical approach.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 11 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 14 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 June 2018.
All research outputs
#13,788,530
of 24,395,432 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#845
of 3,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,207
of 321,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#29
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,395,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,161 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.