ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2006
Two quality control exercises involving nucleic acid amplification methods for detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae and carried out 2 years apart (in 2002 and 2004).
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mycoplasma pneumoniae from the Respiratory Tract and Beyond.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2017Review
- Article
- Respiratory tract infections during the 2011 Mycoplasma pneumoniae epidemic.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2013Article
- Molecular methods for the detection of Mycoplasma and ureaplasma infections in humans: a paper from the 2011 William Beaumont Hospital Symposium on molecular pathology.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2012Review
- Bacterial causes of empyema in children, Australia, 2007-2009.Emerging infectious diseases · 2011Article
- Acute respiratory infection due to Mycoplasma pneumoniae: current status of diagnostic methods.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2010Review
- Quantitative real-time PCR is not more sensitive than "conventional" PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2008Article
- Currently used nucleic acid amplification tests for the detection of viruses and atypicals in acute respiratory infections.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2007Review
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 quality performance of laboratories for the detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydophila pneumoniae by two quality control (QC) exercises with a 2-year interval was investigated. For the 2002 QC exercise, specimens were spiked with M. pneumoniae at concentrations of 5,000, 500, 50, and 0 color-changing units (CCU)/100 microl. The limit of detectability was 50 CCU/100 microl. Therefore, this concentration was omitted from the 2004 panel and was excluded from the analysis. In 2002, 2 out of 12 participants obtained 100% correct results, 2 out of 12 produced false-positive results, and 10 out of 12 had between 0 out of 9 and 8 out of 9 correct positive results. In 2004, correct results were obtained in 15 out of 18 tests, and no false-positive results were reported. In 2002, specimens were spiked with C. pneumoniae at concentrations of 490, 49, 4.9, and 0 inclusion-forming units/100 microl (IFU/100 microl). In the 2004 panel, samples spiked with a lower dilution of 0.49 IFU/100 microl were added to the panel. For the C. pneumoniae QC, correct results were produced in 12 out of 16 and 13 out of 18 tests in 2002 and in 2004, respectively. Both multiplex PCR and nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (NASBA) formats scored a smaller number of samples positive than the monoplex reactions.
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.