ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2009
International external quality assurance for laboratory diagnosis of diphtheria.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2009. 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, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diphtheria Outbreak in Somalia: An Alarming Public Health Crisis, Challenges, and Solutions.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Challenges of Diphtheria Toxin Detection.Toxins · 2024Review
- Epitope Mapping of the Diphtheria Toxin and Development of an ELISA-Specific Diagnostic Assay.Vaccines · 2021Article
- Whole Genome Sequencing for Surveillance of Diphtheria in Low Incidence Settings.Frontiers in public health · 2019Review
- External quality assessments for microbiologic diagnosis of diphtheria in Europe.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- The genus corynebacterium and other medically relevant coryneform-like bacteria.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2012Review
- Diphtheria in the postepidemic period, Europe, 2000-2009.Emerging infectious diseases · 2012Article
- Rapid detection and molecular differentiation of toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae and Corynebacterium ulcerans strains by LightCycler PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diphtheria surveillance network (DIPNET) encompassing National Diphtheria Reference Centers from 25 European countries is a Dedicated Surveillance Network recognized by the European Commission. A key DIPNET objective is the quality assessment of microbiological procedures for diphtheria across the European Union and beyond. A detailed questionnaire on the level of reference laboratory services and an external quality assessment (EQA) panel comprising six simulated throat specimens were sent to 34 centers. Twenty-three centers are designated National Diphtheria Reference Centers, with the laboratory in the United Kingdom being the only WHO Collaborating Centre. A variety of screening and identification tests were used, including the cysteinase test (20/34 centers), pyrazinamidase test (17/34 centers), and commercial kits (25/34 centers). The classic Elek test for toxigenicity testing is mostly used (28/34 centers), with variations in serum sources and antitoxin concentrations. Many laboratories reported problems obtaining Elek reagents or media. Only six centers produced acceptable results for all six specimens. Overall, 21% of identification and 13% of toxigenicity reports were unacceptable. Many centers could not isolate the target organism, and most found difficulties with the specimens that contained Corynebacterium striatum as a commensal contaminant. Nineteen centers generated either false-positive or negative toxigenic results, which may have caused inappropriate medical management. The discrepancies in this diphtheria diagnostics EQA alarmingly reflect the urgent need to improve laboratory performance in diphtheria diagnostics in Europe, standardize feasible and robust microbiological methods, and build awareness among public health authorities. Therefore, DIPNET recommends that regular workshops and EQA distributions for diphtheria diagnostics should be supported and maintained.
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.