ArticleVirology journal2025
Diagnostic criteria for Epstein-barr virus-associated encephalitis: a comment on Liu et al.
Article in Virology journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reply to Sheybani et al : Diagnostic criteria for Epstein-Barr virus-associated encephalitis: A comment on Liu et al.Virology journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe read with great interest the article by Liu et al., titled "Clinical features and risk factors for Epstein-Barr virus-associated encephalitis: a retrospective cohort study." The study provides valuable insights into the clinical spectrum and risk factors associated with EBV-related encephalitis. MAIN BODY: While Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is frequently detected in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) during CNS infections, its role as a primary pathogen remains uncertain, especially in immunocompromised patients. We commend the authors for their efforts but seek clarification on the diagnostic criteria used to attribute causality to EBV. Specifically, we question whether the diagnosis relied solely on the detection of EBV DNA in the CSF or whether supporting parameters, such as viral load, CSF/serum ratios, or intrathecal antibody synthesis, were considered. The distinction between causative and incidental EBV detection is clinically significant and remains a challenge in neuroinfectious disease practice.
conclusionFurther elaboration on how EBV-associated encephalitis was defined in the study would enhance its clinical relevance and aid practitioners encountering similar diagnostic complexities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.