ArticleBMJ public health2026
Evaluation of optimal pooling strategies for Mpox virus genomic surveillance using the Illumina Viral Surveillance Panel on the iSeq100 platform in outbreak settings.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Genomic surveillance is critical for outbreak control and pathogen intelligence, yet protocols such as the Illumina Viral Surveillance Panel (VSP) remain under-evaluated in low-resource and mobile laboratory settings. A key operational question is whether sample pooling can increase throughput without compromising enrichment yield, genome coverage, variant resolution or assembly quality. Methods: We conducted an empirical evaluation using Mpox virus (MPXV)-positive clinical specimens collected during the 2024 outbreak in Burundi. Hybrid-capture reactions were performed with pooled sets of 3, 6, 9 and 15 samples, sequenced on the Illumina iSeq100 platform. We assessed viral enrichment yield, genome coverage, sequencing depth, variant resolution, detection sensitivity and assembly quality across pooling levels. Results: The standard three-sample protocol yielded optimal performance across most parameters. Pools of six samples maintained high genome coverage (≥90% at 10×), robust enrichment and reliable variant resolution, indicating that pooling up to six samples preserves data quality for genomic surveillance. Pools of nine or more showed marked performance losses, particularly for high-Ct specimens, with reduced enrichment yield, genome completeness and variant sensitivity. Nonetheless, viral identification remained feasible even at pooling levels up to fifteen. Conclusions: Multiplexing beyond three samples can balance cost-efficiency and genomic fidelity in resource-limited settings using the VSP/iSeq100 workflow. These findings support a tiered pooling strategy and provide a practical basis for adaptive genomic surveillance tailored to outbreak response needs.
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.