Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17021116›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2006

Comparison of PCR-based methods for typing Staphylococcus aureus isolates.

Artur Sabat, Natalia Malachowa, Jacek Miedzobrodzki, Waleria Hryniewicz

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Genetic Diversity of Methicillin-ResistantInternational journal of microbiology · 2026
    Article
  2. The synergy ofThe Pan African medical journal · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Study on Molecular Profiles ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Distribution of the Most PrevalentFrontiers in microbiology · 2018
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Multilocus variable number tandem repeat analysis for Salmonella enterica subspecies.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2011
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Artur SabatNational Institute of Public Health, 30/34 Chelmska St., 00-725 Warsaw, Poland.
Natalia Malachowa
Jacek Miedzobrodzki
Waleria Hryniewicz
Jagiellonian University · PLNational Institute of Public Health · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we compared the potentials of (i) a multiplex PCR-based multilocus variable-number tandem repeat (VNTR) assay; (ii) a triplex PCR coamplifying fragments of spa, coa, and the hypervariable region adjacent to the mecA gene; (iii) restriction profile analysis of the STAR repetitive element; (iv) randomly amplified polymorphic DNA analysis; (v) inter-IS256 PCR; and (vi) rep-MP3 PCR. Multilocus VNTR typing and triplex PCR (coa, spa, and hypervariable region) approaches showed excellent reproducibility and high discriminatory power; however, only multilocus VNTR typing could distinguish all pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and spa types. Multilocus VNTR typing appears to be the most useful PCR-based method for the rapid genotyping of Staphylococcus aureus strains.

Indexed as

Bacterial Typing TechniquesGenotypePolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsStaphylococcus aureus

Identifiers

PMID17021116
PMCPMC1594760
OpenAlexW2140004974

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.