Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12409398›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2002

Molecular methods for cytomegalovirus surveillance in bone marrow transplant recipients.

Adriana Weinberg, Debra Schissel, Roger Giller

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Adriana WeinbergDepartments of Pediatrics, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado 80262, USA. Adriana.Weinberg@uchsc.edu
Debra Schissel
Roger Giller
Children's Hospital Colorado · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two different methods for detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV), PCR and hybrid capture (HC), were compared by using plasma, peripheral blood leukocytes (PBLs), and whole blood (WB) from allogeneic bone marrow transplant recipients. One hundred specimens were obtained from nine children over an 18-month surveillance period. PCR of plasma for CMV was used for clinical management. The proportions of samples positive for CMV DNA by PCR with plasma, HC with WB, and PCR with PBLs were 21, 28, and 37%, respectively. Among 44 samples that were tested by all three methods, 68% had concordant results. By using a robust definition of true-positive samples (positivity by two or more methods or positivity of sequential samples by one method), the sensitivities of PCR with plasma, HC with WB, and PCR with PBLs were 50, 67, and 83%, respectively, and the specificities were 100, 96, and 96%, respectively. Two patients developed CMV-associated end-organ disease (one developed respiratory disease, and one developed gastrointestinal disease). CMV DNA was not detected in the plasma 1 week prior to the development of symptoms in either patient, whereas HC with WB was positive for both patients and PCR with PBLs was for one patient. These data suggest that WB or PBLs might be the preferred sample for use for surveillance for CMV in immunocompromised patients.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBone Marrow TransplantationChildCytomegalovirusCytomegalovirus InfectionsDNA, ViralFemaleHumansLeukocytes, MononuclearMaleNucleic Acid HybridizationPlasmaPolymerase Chain ReactionTransplantation, HomologousDNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID12409398
PMCPMC139700
OpenAlexW2127990567

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.