Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19105808›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2008

Comparison of the MicroScan, VITEK 2, and Crystal GP with 16S rRNA sequencing and MicroSeq 500 v2.0 analysis for coagulase-negative Staphylococci.

Miyoung Kim, Se Ran Heo, Soon Hee Choi, Hyelin Kwon, Jeong Su Park, Moon-Woo Seong, Do-Hoon Lee, Kyoung Un Park, Junghan Song, Eui-Chong Kim

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Case reports in infectious diseases · 2026
    Article
  3. Phylogenetic analysis ofOpen veterinary journal · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Antibiotic-resistantSaudi journal of biological sciences · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Validation of the MicroScan-96 for the species identification and methicillin susceptibility testing of clinical significant coagulase-negative staphylococci.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Miyoung KimDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehang-no, Jongno-gu, Seoul, South Korea. rabbit790622@gmail.com
Se Ran Heo
Soon Hee Choi
Hyelin Kwon
Jeong Su Park
Moon-Woo Seong
Do-Hoon Lee
Kyoung Un Park
Junghan Song
Eui-Chong Kim

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThree phenotypic identification systems (MicroScan, VITEK 2, and Crystal GP) were evaluated for their accuracy to identify coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS). A total of 120 clinical isolates confirmed to be CNS via 16S rRNA sequencing and analysis with the MicroSeq 500 v2.0 database were assessed.

resultsThe MicroScan, VITEK 2, and Crystal GP systems correctly identified 82.5%, 87.5%, and 67.5% of the isolates, respectively. Misidentification was the main problem in MicroScan (10.8%) and Crystal GP (23.3%) systems, whereas the main problem of VITEK 2 was low-level discrimination (7.5%).

conclusionNone of the 3 phenotypic systems tested could accurately and reliably identify CNS at the species level. Further verifications such as biochemical testing or 16S rRNA sequencing together with analysis using a comparable database might be helpful in this regard.

Indexed as

Bacteriological TechniquesCoagulasePhenotypeReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcusCoagulaseRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID19105808
PMCPMC2633347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.