ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1999
Value of enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus PCR for study of Pasteurella multocida strains isolated from mouths of dogs.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- (CGG)4-based PCR as a novel tool for discrimination of uropathogenic Escherichia coli strains: comparison with enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2009Article
- Molecular variability among strains of Pasteurella multocida isolated from an outbreak of haemorrhagic septicaemia in India.Veterinary research communications · 2004Article
- Evaluation of genotyping large numbers of Escherichia coli isolates by enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Article
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
Fifty-six Pasteurella multocida strains (40 P. multocida subsp. septica and 16 P. multocida subsp. multocida strains) isolated from the mouths of 56 dogs among the 134 living in a French canine military training center (132e Groupe Cynophile de l'Armée de Terre, Suippes, France) were studied by use of enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-PCR (ERIC-PCR) and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) techniques. Both techniques showed genomic heterogeneity of the strains studied. However, RFLP was more discriminatory than ERIC-PCR for differentiating P. multocida strains. All but three pairs of strains were discriminated by RFLP, suggesting a limited circulation of strains between these dogs living in proximity. Although ERIC-PCR is easier and faster to perform, it cannot be recommended for epidemiological studies of P. multocida strains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.