A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Droplet digital PCR for fish pathogen detection and quantification: A systematic review and meta-analysis. | LitMetric

This study provides a comprehensive summary of the findings regarding the application and diagnostic efficacy of droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in detecting viral and bacterial pathogens in aquaculture. Utilizing a systematic search of four databases up to 6 November 2023, we identified studies where ddPCR was deployed for pathogen detection in aquaculture settings, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy guidelines. From the collected data, 16 studies retrieved, seven were included in a meta-analysis, encompassing 1121 biological samples from various fish species. The detection limits reported ranged markedly from 0.07 to 34 copies/μL. A direct comparison of the diagnostic performance between ddPCR with quantitative PCR (qPCR) proved challenging due to limited data, thus only a pooled sensitivity analysis was feasible. The results showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.750 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.487-0.944) for ddPCR, compared to 0.461 (95% CI: 0.294-0.632) for qPCR, with no statistically significant difference in sensitivity between the two methods (p = .5884). Notably, significant heterogeneity was observed among the studies (I = 93%-97%, p < .01), with the year of publication significantly influencing this heterogeneity (p < .001), but not the country of origin (p = .49). No publication bias was detected, and the studies generally exhibited a low risk of bias according to QUADAS-C criteria. While ddPCR and qPCR showed comparable sensitivities in pathogen detection, ddPCR's capability to precisely quantify pathogens without the need for standard curves highlights its potential utility. This characteristic could significantly enhance the accuracy and reliability of pathogen detection in aquaculture.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfd.14019DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

droplet digital
8
digital pcr
8
pathogen detection
8
pooled sensitivity
8
pcr fish
4
fish pathogen
4
detection quantification
4
quantification systematic
4
systematic review
4
review meta-analysis
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!