Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15112062›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2004

Rapid diagnosis of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia using S. aureus PNA FISH.

V González, E Padilla, M Giménez, C Vilaplana, A Pérez, G Fernández, M D Quesada, M A Pallarés, V Ausina

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Rapid and Simple Approaches for Diagnosis ofPolish journal of microbiology · 2022
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Medicine · 2010
    Article
  7. Recent advances in diagnostic microbiology.Seminars in hematology · 2009
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

V GonzálezServicio de Microbiología, Hospital Universitario Germans Trias i Pujol, Carretera. del Canyet s/n, Badalona, 08916 Barcelona, Spain.
E Padilla
M Giménez
C Vilaplana
A Pérez
G Fernández
M D Quesada
M A Pallarés
V Ausina
Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the study presented here, the performance of the S. aureus PNA FISH assay was evaluated using 285 blood cultures (from 104 patients) that had gram-positive cocci resembling staphylococci on Gram stain. The new molecular test is based on a fluorescence in situ hybridization assay using peptide nucleic acid probes targeting Staphylococcus aureus 16S rRNA and is designed for the rapid identification of Staphylococcus aureus directly from positive blood cultures. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the S. aureus PNA FISH for the rapid identification of Staphylococcus aureus directly from positive blood culture bottles were 100, 99.4, 99.2 and 100%, respectively.

Indexed as

In Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceBacteremiaBloodCulture MediaHumansPeptide Nucleic AcidsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcus aureusTime FactorsCulture MediaPeptide Nucleic AcidsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID15112062
OpenAlexW1977395095

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.