ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2002
Utility of gram staining for evaluation of the quality of cystic fibrosis sputum samples.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical Guidance for Clinical Microbiology Laboratories: Updated guidance for processing respiratory tract samples from people with cystic fibrosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Diagnostic performance of an in-house multiplex PCR assay and the retrospective surveillance of bacterial respiratory pathogens at a teaching hospital, Kelantan, Malaysia.Pathogens and global health · 2023Article
- Microbiology sampling in non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis cases from northern Alberta.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Pulmonary exacerbations in cystic fibrosis with negative bacterial cultures.Pediatric pulmonology · 2010Article
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
The microscopic examination of Gram-stained sputum specimens is very helpful in the evaluation of patients with community-acquired pneumonia and has also been recommended for use in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients. This study was undertaken to evaluate that recommendation. One hundred one sputum samples from CF patients were cultured for gram-negative bacilli and examined by Gram staining for both sputum adequacy (using the quality [Q] score) and bacterial morphology. Subjective evaluation of adequacy was also performed and categorized. Based on Q score evaluation, 41% of the samples would have been rejected despite a subjective appearance of purulence. Only three of these rejected samples were culture negative for gram-negative CF pathogens. Correlation between culture results and quantitative Gram stain examination was also poor. These data suggest that subjective evaluation combined with comprehensive bacteriology is superior to Gram staining in identifying pathogens in CF sputum.
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.