Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

Volume 15, Number 3—March 2009

Dispatch

Coordinated Implementation of Chikungunya Virus Reverse Transcription–PCR

Marcus Panning, Remi N. Charrel, Oliver D. Mantke, Olfert Landt, Matthias Niedrig, and Christian DrostenComments to Author 
Author affiliations: Bernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine, Hamburg, Germany (M. Panning); Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille, France (R.N. Charrel); Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany (O.D. Mantke, M. Niedrig); TIB MOLBIOL, Berlin (O. Landt); University of Bonn Medical Centre, Bonn, Germany (C. Drosten)

Main Article

Figure

Probit analysis of laboratories with a positive result (y axes) for chikungunya virus in relation to viral RNA concentration in positive samples (x axes). A) Laboratories using in-house reverse transcription–PCRs (RT-PCRs) (n = 18) had a 50% certainty of having a positive result at 10,000 RNA copies/mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 3,162–19,952). B) Laboratories using a preformulated RT-PCR (n = 13) had a 50% certainty of having a positive result at 1,288 RNA copies/mL (95% CI 416–2,344). Data p

Figure. Probit analysis of laboratories with a positive result (y axes) for chikungunya virus in relation to viral RNA concentration in positive samples (x axes). A) Laboratories using in-house reverse transcription–PCRs (RT-PCRs) (n = 18) had a 50% certainty of having a positive result at 10,000 RNA copies/mL (95% confidence interval [CI] 3,162–19,952). B) Laboratories using a preformulated RT-PCR (n = 13) had a 50% certainty of having a positive result at 1,288 RNA copies/mL (95% CI 416–2,344). Data points represent individual samples in the test panel. Thick line is the regression line calculated on the basis of a probit model (dose-response curve), and thin lines are 95% CIs. Data fit into the model with p<0.00001.

Main Article

TOP