Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12089293›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2002

Accuracy of results obtained by performing a second ligase chain reaction assay and PCR analysis on urine samples with positive or near-cutoff results in the LCx test for Chlamydia trachomatis.

S Castriciano, K Luinstra, D Jang, J Patel, J Mahony, J Kapala, M Chernesky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Reproducibility and specificity concerns associated with nucleic acid amplification tests for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2009
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

S CastricianoHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program, and the Father Sean O'Sullivan Research Centre, St. Joseph's Healthcare, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8N 4A6.
K Luinstra
D Jang
J Patel
J Mahony
J Kapala
M Chernesky

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nucleic acid amplification assays such as the ligase chain reaction and PCR have encountered reproducibility problems. The initial extract and a newly extracted aliquot of urine specimens (n = 120) which had signal-to-cutoff (S/CO) ratios above 0.80 by the LCx Chlamydia assay were retested. Nucleic acid was extracted from an additional urine sample for testing by the AMPLICOR PCR Chlamydia assay. Fifteen percent (18 of 120) of the urine specimens were negative by all repeat tests (initial mean S/CO ratio by the LCx Chlamydia assay, 0.93; S/CO ratio range, 0.80 to 3.30). Repeat testing of the 102 specimens with possible positive results by the LCx Chlamydia assay by use of the initially extracted aliquot confirmed the results for 95 (93.1%) of the specimens; repeat testing of a newly extracted aliquot confirmed the results for 87 (85.3%) of the specimens. Twenty specimens had discordant results by the two repeat LCx Chlamydia assays. A total of 78 of 102 (76.5%) of the specimens were positive by the AMPLICOR PCR, and the AMPLICOR PCR confirmed the results for 82.1% (78 of 95) and 89.6% (78 of 87) of the specimens positive by the two repeat LCx Chlamydia assays, respectively. Some of the discrepancies observed by multiple repeat tests may have been due to specimen mislabeling or contamination during performance of the procedure rather than to the LCx Chlamydia assay. Both assays suffered from a lack of reproducibility on repeat testing with a small proportion of specimens, probably due to the presence of low levels of DNA, the presence of variable amounts of amplification inhibitors, and the loss of DNA during extraction.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisDNA, BacterialFemaleHumansLigase Chain ReactionMalePolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsUrinary Tract InfectionsUrineDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID12089293
PMCPMC120557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.