Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17347855›Full record

ReviewWiener klinische Wochenschrift2007

Molecular epidemiology of tuberculosis: toy or tool? A review of the literature and examples from Central Europe.

Wolfgang M Prodinger

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

1 author.

Wolfgang M ProdingerDivision of Hygiene and Medical Microbiology, Department of Hygiene, Microbiology and Social Medicine, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria. wolfgang.prodinger@i-med.ac.at

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genotyping has become an indispensable tool in medical microbiology and epidemiology. One of the first targets has been Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Over the past 15 years approximately 900 pertinent publications have substantiated the value of the genotyping approach for tuberculosis control. New insights into the understanding of the natural history of tuberculosis, especially regarding the frequencies of reactivation, reinfection or multiple infection entailed adaptations of pathophysiological concepts. However, assessment of recent transmission, outbreak analysis, and detection of laboratory contamination still form the genuine scope of genotyping. Detection of unsuspected clusters of cases can provide clues to search for further, undetected cases. Uncovering false positive cultures spares the risks and costs of unnecessary treatment and may reveal systematic laboratory weaknesses. Several European countries already profit from nationwide prospective fingerprinting. After providing genotyping results to public health officials, these were able to document epidemiological links for substantially more tuberculosis patients. On a global scale, strain families and particular strains have been identified, characterised and traced in their spread. The importation of Beijing-genotype multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis into Central European countries will be described here as an example. The goal for further developments is the ability to compare isolates for epidemiological purposes in a single step that also comprises species determination, drug resistance testing and detection of pathogenicity factors.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic MethodsEuropeHumansMicrobiological TechniquesMycobacterium tuberculosisPopulation SurveillancePrevalenceRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTuberculosis

Identifiers

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.