Уважаемые коллеги, доброго времени суток! Представляем вам нидерландское научное издание Journal of Clinical Virology. Журнал имеет первый квартиль, издаётся в Elsevier, его SJR за 2021 г. равен 3,355, импакт-фактор 14, 481, печатный ISSN - 1386-6532, электронный - 1873-5967, предметные области - Вирусология, Инфекционные болезни. Вот так выглядит обложка:
Здесь два редактора - Берт Ниестерс, контактные данные - h.g.m.niesters@umcg.nl
и Бенжамин Пински - bpinsky@stanford.edu.
Это международный журнал, публикующий статьи по любому аспекту вирусологии человека, который непосредственно относится к клиническим состояниям, вызванным вирусом. Статьи из любой области вирусологических исследований будут рассмотрены, если материал имеет отношение к пониманию или манипулированию болезненным состоянием.
Адрес издания - https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-clinical-virology
Пример статьи, название - Importance of external quality assessment for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Заголовок (Abstract)
Background: Antigen testing has become an essential part of fighting the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. With the continual increase in available tests, independent and extensive comparative evaluations using data from external quality assessment (EQA) studies to evaluate test performance between different users are required.
Objectives: An EQA scheme was established to assess the sensitivity of antigen tests and the potential impact of circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains on their performance.
Study design: Panels were prepared for three challenges in 2021 containing inactivated SARS-CoV-2-positive samples of various genetic strains (including variants of concern, VOCs) at different concentrations, and negative samples. Data was analysed based on qualitative testing results in relation to the antigen test used.
Results: Participants registered for each individual challenge in any combination. In total, 258 respondents from 27 countries worldwide were counted submitting 472 datasets. All core samples were correctly reported by 76.7 to 83.1% at participant level and by 73.5 to 83.8% at dataset level. Sensitivity differences could be shown in viral loads and SARS-CoV-2 strains/variants including the impact on performance by a B.1.1.7-like mutant strain with a deletion in the nucleoprotein gene. Lateral flow rapid antigen tests showed a higher rate of false negatives in general compared with automated point-of-care tests and laboratory ELISA/immunoassays.
Conclusions: EQA schemes can provide valuable data to inform participants about weaknesses in their testing process or methods and support ongoing assay evaluations for regulatory approval or post-market surveillanc.
Keywords: Severe acute respiratory syndrome; Antigen test; COVID-19 testing; Sensitivity; SARS-CoV-2 variants; Quality assurance
