A number of various diseases may present with symptoms similar to those caused by a clinical West Nile virus infection. Those causing neuroinvasive disease symptoms include the enterovirus infection and bacterial meningitis. Accounting for differential diagnoses is a crucial step in the definitive diagnosis of WNV infection. Consideration of a differential diagnosis is required when a patient presents with unexplained febrile illness, extreme headache, encephalitis or meningitis. Diagnostic and serologic laboratory testing using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and viral culture of CSF to identify the specific pathogen causing the symptoms, is the only currently available means of differentiating between causes of encephalitis and meningitis.

Preliminary diagnosis is often based on the patient's clinical symptoms, places and dates of travel (if patient is from a nonendemic country or area), activities, and epidemiologic history of the location where infection occurred. A recent history of mosquito bites and an acute febrile illness associated with neurologic signs and symptoms should cause clinical suspicion of WNV.

Diagnosis of West Nile virus infections is generally accomplished by serologic testing of blood serum or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), which is obtained via a lumbar puncture. Initial screening could be done using the ELISA technique detecting immunoglobulins in the sera of the tested individuals.

Typical findings of WNV infection include lymphocytic pleocytosis, elevated protein level, reference glucose and lactic acid levels, and no erythrocytes.

Definitive diagnosis of WNV is obtained through detection of virus-specific antibody IgM and neutralizing antibodies. Cases of West Nile virus meningitis and encephalitis that have been serologically confirmed produce similar degrees of CSF pleocytosis and are often associated with substantial CSF neutrophilia.

Specimens collected within eight days following onset of illness may not test positive for West Nile IgM, and testing should be repeated. A positive test for West Nile IgG in the absence of a positive West Nile IgM is indicative of a previous flavavirus infection and is not by itself evidence of an acute West Nile virus infection.

If cases of suspected West Nile virus infection, sera should be collected on both the acute and

convalescent phases of the illness. Convalescent specimens should be collected 2–3 weeks after acute specimens.

It is common in serologic testing for cross-reactions to occur among flaviviruses such as dengue virus (DENV) and tick-borne encephalitis virus; this necessitates caution when evaluating serologic results of flaviviral infections.

Four FDA-cleared WNV IgM ELISA kits are commercially available from different manufacturers in the U.S., each of these kits is indicated for use on serum to aid in the presumptive laboratory diagnosis of WNV infection in patients with clinical symptoms of meningitis or encephalitis. Positive WNV test results obtained via use of these kits should be confirmed by additional testing at a state health department laboratory or CDC.

In fatal cases, nucleic acid amplification, histopathology with immunohistochemistry, and virus culture of autopsy tissues can also be useful. Only a few state laboratories or other specialized laboratories, including those at CDC, are capable of doing this specialized testing.

Japanese encephalitis is diagnosed by commercially available tests detecting JE virus-specific IgM antibodies in serum and /or cerebrospinal fluid, for example by IgM capture ELISA.

JE virus IgM antibodies are usually detectable 3 to 8 days after onset of illness and persist for 30 to 90 days, but longer persistence has been documented. Therefore, positive IgM antibodies occasionally may reflect a past infection or vaccination. Serum collected within 10 days of illness onset may not have detectable IgM, and the test should be repeated on a convalescent sample. For patients with JE virus IgM antibodies, confirmatory neutralizing antibody testing should be performed.

Confirmatory testing in the US is only available at CDC and a few specialized reference laboratories. In fatal cases, nucleic acid amplification, and virus culture of autopsy tissues can be useful. Viral antigen can be shown in tissues by indirect fluorescent antibody staining.

Previous methods of diagnosis included HI, complement fixation, neutralization tests, and injecting the serum of infected individuals into mice. However, new research has introduced more efficient methods to diagnose KFDV. These methods include: nested RT-PCR, TaqMan-based real-time RT-PCR, and immunoglobin M antibodies detection by ELISA. The two methods involving PCR are able to function by attaching a primer to the NS-5 gene which is highly conserved among the genus to which KFDV belongs. The last method allows for the detections of anti-KFDV antibodies in patients.

The differential diagnosis in a case of suspected human rabies may initially include any cause of encephalitis, in particular infection with viruses such as herpesviruses, enteroviruses, and arboviruses such as West Nile virus. The most important viruses to rule out are herpes simplex virus type one, varicella zoster virus, and (less commonly) enteroviruses, including coxsackieviruses, echoviruses, polioviruses, and human enteroviruses 68 to 71.

New causes of viral encephalitis are also possible, as was evidenced by the 1999 outbreak in Malaysia of 300 cases of encephalitis with a mortality rate of 40% caused by Nipah virus, a newly recognized paramyxovirus. Likewise, well-known viruses may be introduced into new locales, as is illustrated by the outbreak of encephalitis due to West Nile virus in the eastern United States. Epidemiologic factors, such as season, geographic location, and the patient's age, travel history, and possible exposure to bites, rodents, and ticks, may help direct the diagnosis.

Diagnosis relies on viral isolation from tissues, or serological testing with an ELISA. Other methods of diagnosis include Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT), cell culture, and IgM antibody assays. As of September 2016, the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) has developed a product called Immunoline, designed to diagnose the disease in humans much faster than in previous methods.

Infection with Japanese encephalitis confers lifelong immunity. There are currently three vaccines available: SA14-14-2, IC51 (marketed in Australia and New Zealand as JESPECT and elsewhere as IXIARO) and ChimeriVax-JE (marketed as IMOJEV). All current vaccines are based on the genotype III virus.

A formalin-inactivated mouse-brain derived vaccine was first produced in Japan in the 1930s and was validated for use in Taiwan in the 1960s and in Thailand in the 1980s. The widespread use of vaccine and urbanization has led to control of the disease in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. The high cost of this vaccine, which is grown in live mice, means that poorer countries have not been able to afford to give it as part of a routine immunization program.

The most common adverse effects are redness and pain at the injection site. Uncommonly, an urticarial reaction can develop about four days after injection. Vaccines produced from mouse brain have a risk of autoimmune neurological complications of around 1 per million vaccinations. However where the vaccine is not produced in mouse brains but in vitro using cell culture there is little adverse effects compared to placebo, the main side effects are headache and myalgia.

The neutralizing antibody persists in the circulation for at least two to three years, and perhaps longer. The total duration of protection is unknown, but because there is no firm evidence for protection beyond three years, boosters are recommended every three years for people who remain at risk. Furthermore, there is also no data available regarding the interchangeability of other JE vaccines and IXIARO.

In September 2012 the Indian firm Biological E. Limited has launched an inactivated cell culture derived vaccine based on SA 14-14-2 strain which was developed in a technology transfer agreement with Intercell and is a thiomersal-free vaccine.

Diagnosis of the oropouche infection is done through classic and molecular virology techniques. These include:

1. Virus isolation attempt in new born mice and cell culture (Vero Cells)

2. Serological assay methods, such as HI (hemagglutination inhibition), NT (neutralization test), and CF (complement fixation test) tests and in-house-enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for total immunoglobulin, IgM, and IgG detection using convalescent sera (this obtained from recovered patients and is rich in antibodies against the infectious agent)

3. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and real time RT-PCR for genome detection in acute samples (sera, blood, and viscera of infected animals)

Clinical diagnosis of oropouche fever is hard to perform due to the nonspecific nature of the disease, in many causes it can be confused with dengue fever or other arbovirus illness.

A vaccine has been conditionally approved for use in animals in the US. It has been shown that knockout of the NSs and NSm nonstructural proteins of this virus produces an effective vaccine in sheep as well.

People reduce the chance of getting infected with LACV by preventing mosquito bites. There is no vaccine or preventive drug.

Prevention measures against LACV include reducing exposure to mosquito bites. Use repellent such as DEET and picaridin, while spending time outside, especially at during the daytime - from dawn until dusk. "Aedes triseriatus" mosquitoes that transmit (LACV) are most active during the day. Wear long sleeves, pants and socks while outdoors. Ensure all screens are in good condition to prevent mosquitoes from entering your home. "Aedes triseriatus" prefer treeholes to lay eggs in. Also, remove stagnant water such as old tires, birdbaths, flower pots, and barrels.

MVD is clinically indistinguishable from Ebola virus disease (EVD), and it can also easily be confused with many other diseases prevalent in Equatorial Africa, such as other viral hemorrhagic fevers, falciparum malaria, typhoid fever, shigellosis, rickettsial diseases such as typhus, cholera, gram-negative septicemia, borreliosis such as relapsing fever or EHEC enteritis. Other infectious diseases that ought to be included in the differential diagnosis include leptospirosis, scrub typhus, plague, Q fever, candidiasis, histoplasmosis, trypanosomiasis, visceral leishmaniasis, hemorrhagic smallpox, measles, and fulminant viral hepatitis. Non-infectious diseases that can be confused with MVD are acute promyelocytic leukemia, hemolytic uremic syndrome, snake envenomation, clotting factor deficiencies/platelet disorders, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia, Kawasaki disease, and even warfarin intoxication. The most important indicator that may lead to the suspicion of MVD at clinical examination is the medical history of the patient, in particular the travel and occupational history (which countries and caves were visited?) and the patient's exposure to wildlife (exposure to bats or bat excrements?). MVD can be confirmed by isolation of marburgviruses from or by detection of marburgvirus antigen or genomic or subgenomic RNAs in patient blood or serum samples during the acute phase of MVD. Marburgvirus isolation is usually performed by inoculation of grivet kidney epithelial Vero E6 or MA-104 cell cultures or by inoculation of human adrenal carcinoma SW-13 cells, all of which react to infection with characteristic cytopathic effects. Filovirions can easily be visualized and identified in cell culture by electron microscopy due to their unique filamentous shapes, but electron microscopy cannot differentiate the various filoviruses alone despite some overall length differences. Immunofluorescence assays are used to confirm marburgvirus presence in cell cultures. During an outbreak, virus isolation and electron microscopy are most often not feasible options. The most common diagnostic methods are therefore RT-PCR in conjunction with antigen-capture ELISA, which can be performed in field or mobile hospitals and laboratories. Indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFAs) are not used for diagnosis of MVD in the field anymore.

As in humans, the sensitivity of testing methods for rodents contributes to the accuracy of diagnosis. LCMV is typically identified through serology. However, in an endemically infected colony, more practical methods include MAP (mouse antibody production) and PCR testing. Another means of diagnosis is introducing a known naïve adult mouse to the suspect rodent colony. The introduced mouse will seroconvert, allowing use of immunofluorescence antibody (IFA), MFIA or ELISA to detect antibodies.

Current or previous infection can be detected through a blood test. However, some authors note that such complement-fixation tests are insensitive and should not be used for diagnosis. Dr. Clare A. Dykewicz, "et al." state,

Clinical diagnosis of LCM can be made by the history of prodrome symptoms and by considering the period of time before the onset of meningitis symptoms, typically 15–21 days for LCM.

Pathological diagnosis of congenital infection is performed using either an immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) test or an enzyme immunoassay to detect specific antibody in blood or cerebrospinal fluid. A PCR assay has been recently developed which may be used in the future for prenatal diagnosis; however, the virus is not always present in the blood or CSF when the affected child is born." Diagnoses is subject to methodological shortcomings in regard to specificity and sensitivity of assays used. For this reason, LCMV may be more common than is realized.

Another detection assay is the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests which may detect nucleic acids in the blood and cerebrospinal fluid.(CSF) Virus isolation is not used for diagnosis in most cases but it can be isolated from the blood or nasopharyngeal fluid early in the course of the disease, or from CSF in patients with meningitis. LCMV can be grown in a variety of cell lines including BHK21, L and Vero cells, and it may be identified with immuno-fluorescence. A diagnosis can also be made by the intracerebral inoculation of blood or CSF into mice.

Definitive diagnosis is usually made at a reference laboratory with advanced biocontainment capabilities. The findings of laboratory investigation vary somewhat between the viruses but in general there is a decrease in the total white cell count (particularly the lymphocytes), a decrease in the platelet count, an increase in the blood serum liver enzymes, and reduced blood clotting ability measured as an increase in both the prothrombin (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin times (PTT). The hematocrit may be elevated. The serum urea and creatine may be raised but this is dependent on the hydration status of the patient. The bleeding time tends to be prolonged.

Prophylaxis by vaccination, as well as preventive measures like protective clothing, tick control, and mosquito control are advised. The vaccine for KFDV consists of formalin-inactivated KFDV. The vaccine has a 62.4% effectiveness rate for individuals who receive two doses. For individuals who receive an additional dose, the effectiveness increases to 82.9%. Specific treatments are not available.

Rabies can be difficult to diagnose, because, in the early stages, it is easily confused with other diseases or with aggressiveness. The reference method for diagnosing rabies is the fluorescent antibody test (FAT), an immunohistochemistry procedure, which is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). The FAT relies on the ability of a detector molecule (usually fluorescein isothiocyanate) coupled with a rabies-specific antibody, forming a conjugate, to bind to and allow the visualisation of rabies antigen using fluorescent microscopy techniques. Microscopic analysis of samples is the only direct method that allows for the identification of rabies virus-specific antigen in a short time and at a reduced cost, irrespective of geographical origin and status of the host. It has to be regarded as the first step in diagnostic procedures for all laboratories. Autolysed samples can, however, reduce the sensitivity and specificity of the FAT. The RT PCR assays proved to be a sensitive and specific tool for routine diagnostic purposes, particularly in decomposed samples or archival specimens. The diagnosis can be reliably made from brain samples taken after death. The diagnosis can also be made from saliva, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid samples, but this is not as sensitive and reliable as brain samples. Cerebral inclusion bodies called Negri bodies are 100% diagnostic for rabies infection but are found in only about 80% of cases. If possible, the animal from which the bite was received should also be examined for rabies.

Some light microscopy techniques may also be used to diagnose rabies at a tenth of the cost of traditional fluorescence microscopy techniques, allowing identification of the disease in less-developed countries.

Omsk Hemorrhagic Fever could be diagnosed by isolating virus from blood, or by serologic testing using immunosorbent serological assay. OHF rating of fatality is 0.5–3%. There is no specific treatment for OHF so far but one way to help get rid of OHF is by supportive therapy. Supportive therapy helps maintain hydration and helps to provide precautions for patients with bleeding disorders.

The disease can be prevented in horses with the use of vaccinations. These vaccinations are usually given together with vaccinations for other diseases, most commonly WEE, VEE, and tetanus. Most vaccinations for EEE consist of the killed virus. For humans there is no vaccine for EEE so prevention involves reducing the risk of exposure. Using repellent, wearing protective clothing, and reducing the amount of standing water is the best means for prevention

A blood test is the only way to confirm a case of Ross River Fever. Several types of blood tests may be used to examine antibody levels in the blood. Tests may either look for simply elevated antibodies (which indicate some sort of infection), or specific antibodies to the virus.

One study has focused on identifying OROV through the use of RNA extraction from reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. This study revealed that OROV caused central nervous system infections in three patients. The three patients all had meningoencephalitis and also showed signs of clear lympho-monocytic cellular pattern in CSF, high protein, and normal to slightly decreased glucose levels indicating they had viral infections. Two of the patients already had underlying infections that can effect the CNS and immune system and in particular one of these patients has HIV/AIDS and the third patient has neurocysticercosis. Two patients were infected with OROV developed meningitis and it was theorized that this is due to them being immunocompromised. Through this it was revealed that it's possible that the invasion of the central nervous system by the oropouche virus can be performed by a pervious blood-brain barrier damage.

Since marburgviruses are not spreading via aerosol, the most straightforward prevention method during MVD outbreaks is to avoid direct (skin-to-skin) contact with patients, their excretions and body fluids, or possibly contaminated materials and utensils. Patients ought to be isolated but still have the right to be visited by family members. Medical staff should be trained and apply strict barrier nursing techniques (disposable face mask, gloves, goggles, and a gown at all times). Traditional burial rituals, especially those requiring embalming of bodies, ought to be discouraged or modified, ideally with the help of local traditional healers.

There is no cure for EEE. Treatment consists of corticosteroids, anticonvulsants, and supportive measures (treating symptoms) such as intravenous fluids, tracheal intubation, and antipyretics. About four percent of humans known to be infected develop symptoms, with a total of about six cases per year in the US. A third of these cases die, and many survivors suffer permanent brain damage.

A Zika virus infection might be suspected if symptoms are present and an individual has traveled to an area with known Zika virus transmission. Zika virus can only be confirmed by a laboratory test of body fluids, such as urine or saliva, or by blood test.

No specific therapy is available at present for La Crosse encephalitis, and management is limited to alleviating the symptoms and balancing fluids and electrolyte levels. Intravenous ribavirin is effective against La Crosse encephalitis virus in the laboratory, and several studies in patients with severe, brain biopsy confirmed, La Crosse encephalitis are ongoing.

In a trial with 15 children being infected with La Crosse viral encephalitis were treated at certain phases with ribavirin (RBV). RBV appeared to be safe at moderate doses. At escalated doses of RBV, adverse events occurred and then the trial was discontinued. Nonetheless, this was the largest study of antiviral treatment for La Crosse encephalitis.

Laboratory blood tests can identify evidence of chikungunya or other similar viruses such as dengue and Zika. Blood test may confirm the presence of IgM and IgG anti-chikungunya antibodies. IgM antibodies are highest 3 to 5 weeks after the beginning of symptoms and will continue be present for about 2 months.