2022
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254303
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of three diagnostic tests for Coxiella burnetii infection in cattle and buffaloes in Punjab (India) using Bayesian latent class analysis

Abstract: Q Fever is a zoonotic disease of significant animal and public health concern, caused by Coxiella burnetii (C. burnetii), an obligate intracellular bacterium. This study was done to evaluate the diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) and diagnostic specificity (DSp) of three diagnostic methods to diagnose C. burnetii infection in cattle and buffaloes in Punjab, India: an indirect ELISA method applied in serum samples and a trans-Polymerase Chain Reaction (trans-PCR) technique applied in milk samples and genital swabs, u… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 38 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Generally, it is necessary that the degrees of freedom offered from the data have to be equal or higher than the number of parameters interest to have an identifiable model. However, this condition is described as necessary but not sufficient for model identifiability (Meletis et al., 2022). Hence, informative prior information for the characteristics of the applied tests were introduced in the analysis.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, it is necessary that the degrees of freedom offered from the data have to be equal or higher than the number of parameters interest to have an identifiable model. However, this condition is described as necessary but not sufficient for model identifiability (Meletis et al., 2022). Hence, informative prior information for the characteristics of the applied tests were introduced in the analysis.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%