Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

The Raw Cycle Threshold Values From Reverse-transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Detection Are Not Viral Load Quantitation Units

16 Jun 2020

Abstract excerpt

To theEditor—I read with great interest the recent publication by Yu and colleagues [1] regarding quantitative detection and viral load analysis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in infected patients. The authors asserted that the results of reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and droplet-digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) for SARS-CoV-2 detection were...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Share to SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Share to Viral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 32562539
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa830

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 8 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

The Raw Cycle Threshold Values From Reverse-transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Detection Are Not Viral Load Quantitation UnitsPMID 32562539Read ↗

Caution in interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 quantification based on RT-PCR cycle threshold valueSemantic proximity Read ↗

SARS-CoV-2 RNA quantification using droplet digital RT-PCRSemantic proximity Read ↗

SARS-CoV-2 RNA Quantification Using Droplet Digital RT-PCRSemantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of Reverse Transcription (RT)-Quantitative PCR and RT-Droplet Digital PCR for Detection of Genomic and Subgenomic SARS-CoV-2 RNASemantic proximity Read ↗

Sensitive Detection and Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 by Multiplex Droplet Digital RT-PCRSemantic proximity Read ↗

Discrepancies in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by qRT-PCR are dependent on the target gene used for its amplification: Implications in the diagnosis of clinical infectionSemantic proximity Read ↗

Direct Quantitation of SARS-CoV-2 Using Droplet Digital PCR in Suspected Samples With Very Low Viral LoadSemantic proximity Read ↗

The Truth about SARS-CoV-2 Cycle Threshold Values Is Rarely Pure and Never SimpleSemantic proximity Read ↗

Inclusion of cycle threshold (CT) values when reporting SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results improves clinical Interpretation in suspected and confirmed COVID-19Semantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of reverse-transcription qPCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in clinical specimens of hospitalized patientsSemantic proximity Read ↗

Characterizing SARS-CoV-2 transcription of subgenomic and genomic RNAs during early human infection using multiplexed ddPCRSemantic proximity Read ↗

Analytical comparisons of SARS-COV-2 detection by qRT-PCR and ddPCR with multiple primer/probe setsSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.