PMC:7068163 / 9414-10036 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"145","span":{"begin":202,"end":203},"obj":"Gene"},{"id":"146","span":{"begin":180,"end":190},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"147","span":{"begin":370,"end":380},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"148","span":{"begin":444,"end":454},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"149","span":{"begin":579,"end":589},"obj":"Species"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A145","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"145","obj":"Gene:43740570"},{"id":"A146","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"146","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A147","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"147","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A148","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"148","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A149","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"149","obj":"Tax:2697049"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"For evaluation of assay performance regarding efficiency, linearity and unspecific signals, we used the SuperScript protocol in a direct comparison of 73 samples with the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 assay. The E gene assays showed 97% (71/73) identical results in both assays (60 negative and 11 positive results as well as two divergent results, both with a positive Real Star SARS-CoV-2 assay and a negative SuperScript protocol assay). The specific SARS-CoV-2 assays gave in 67 (92%) identical results (60 negative and seven positive) and six divergent results. Overall, the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 kit seemed to be more sensitive."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T35","span":{"begin":204,"end":208},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A35","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T35","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma74402"}],"text":"For evaluation of assay performance regarding efficiency, linearity and unspecific signals, we used the SuperScript protocol in a direct comparison of 73 samples with the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 assay. The E gene assays showed 97% (71/73) identical results in both assays (60 negative and 11 positive results as well as two divergent results, both with a positive Real Star SARS-CoV-2 assay and a negative SuperScript protocol assay). The specific SARS-CoV-2 assays gave in 67 (92%) identical results (60 negative and seven positive) and six divergent results. Overall, the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 kit seemed to be more sensitive."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-MONDO","denotations":[{"id":"T35","span":{"begin":180,"end":188},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T36","span":{"begin":370,"end":378},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T37","span":{"begin":444,"end":452},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T38","span":{"begin":579,"end":587},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A35","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T35","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A36","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T36","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A37","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T37","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"},{"id":"A38","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T38","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005091"}],"text":"For evaluation of assay performance regarding efficiency, linearity and unspecific signals, we used the SuperScript protocol in a direct comparison of 73 samples with the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 assay. The E gene assays showed 97% (71/73) identical results in both assays (60 negative and 11 positive results as well as two divergent results, both with a positive Real Star SARS-CoV-2 assay and a negative SuperScript protocol assay). The specific SARS-CoV-2 assays gave in 67 (92%) identical results (60 negative and seven positive) and six divergent results. Overall, the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 kit seemed to be more sensitive."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T95","span":{"begin":83,"end":90},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/SO_0000418"},{"id":"T96","span":{"begin":128,"end":129},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T97","span":{"begin":204,"end":208},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/OGG_0000000002"},{"id":"T98","span":{"begin":228,"end":230},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0054055"},{"id":"T99","span":{"begin":285,"end":287},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0053733"},{"id":"T100","span":{"begin":349,"end":350},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T101","span":{"begin":391,"end":392},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"}],"text":"For evaluation of assay performance regarding efficiency, linearity and unspecific signals, we used the SuperScript protocol in a direct comparison of 73 samples with the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 assay. The E gene assays showed 97% (71/73) identical results in both assays (60 negative and 11 positive results as well as two divergent results, both with a positive Real Star SARS-CoV-2 assay and a negative SuperScript protocol assay). The specific SARS-CoV-2 assays gave in 67 (92%) identical results (60 negative and seven positive) and six divergent results. Overall, the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 kit seemed to be more sensitive."}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T75","span":{"begin":0,"end":197},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T76","span":{"begin":198,"end":430},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T77","span":{"begin":431,"end":556},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T78","span":{"begin":557,"end":622},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"For evaluation of assay performance regarding efficiency, linearity and unspecific signals, we used the SuperScript protocol in a direct comparison of 73 samples with the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 assay. The E gene assays showed 97% (71/73) identical results in both assays (60 negative and 11 positive results as well as two divergent results, both with a positive Real Star SARS-CoV-2 assay and a negative SuperScript protocol assay). The specific SARS-CoV-2 assays gave in 67 (92%) identical results (60 negative and seven positive) and six divergent results. Overall, the RealStar SARS-CoV-2 kit seemed to be more sensitive."}