Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20227222›Full record

ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2010

Microfluidic platform versus conventional real-time polymerase chain reaction for the detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in respiratory specimens.

Elizabeth Wulff-Burchfield, Wiley A Schell, Allen E Eckhardt, Michael G Pollack, Zhishan Hua, Jeremy L Rouse, Vamsee K Pamula, Vijay Srinivasan, Jonathan L Benton, Barbara D Alexander and 5 more

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Digital Microfluidics for Nucleic Acid Amplification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017
    Review
  10. Comparison ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2016
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Evaluation of a digital microfluidic real-time PCR platform to detect DNA of Candida albicans in blood.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Effects of atypical infections with Mycoplasma and Chlamydia on asthma.Immunology and allergy clinics of North America · 2010
    Review
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

15 authors.

Elizabeth Wulff-BurchfieldSchool of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Wiley A Schell
Allen E Eckhardt
Michael G Pollack
Zhishan Hua
Jeremy L Rouse
Vamsee K Pamula
Vijay Srinivasan
Jonathan L Benton
Barbara D Alexander
David A Wilfret
Monica Kraft
Charles B Cairns
John R Perfect
Thomas G Mitchell

Funding

Microfluidic PCR Platform to Detect Microbial DNAU01AI066590 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI MITCHELL, THOMAS G. · 2005 to 2009
$3.0M
Mid-Career Investigator Award: Preventing and Diagnosing Fungal DiseaseK24AI072522 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI ALEXANDER, BARBARA D · 2007 to 2011
$583k
NIAID NIH HHS K24 AI 072522NIAID NIH HHS K24 AI072522NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI 066590NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI066590
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid, accurate diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) due to Mycoplasma pneumoniae is compromised by low sensitivity of culture and serology. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has emerged as a sensitive method to detect M. pneumoniae DNA in clinical specimens. However, conventional real-time PCR is not cost-effective for routine or outpatient implementation. Here, we evaluate a novel microfluidic real-time PCR platform (Advanced Liquid Logic, Research Triangle Park, NC) that is rapid, portable, and fully automated. We enrolled patients with CAP and extracted DNA from nasopharyngeal wash (NPW) specimens using a biotinylated capture probe and streptavidin-coupled magnetic beads. Each extract was tested for M. pneumoniae-specific DNA by real-time PCR on both conventional and microfluidic platforms using Taqman probe and primers. Three of 59 (5.0%) NPWs were positive, and agreement between the methods was 98%. The microfluidic platform was equally sensitive but 3 times faster and offers an inexpensive and convenient diagnostic test for microbial DNA.

Indexed as

AutomationBacteriological TechniquesCommunity-Acquired InfectionsHumansMicrofluidicsMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMycoplasma pneumoniaeNasopharynxPneumonia, MycoplasmaPoint-of-Care SystemsPolymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID20227222
PMCPMC2854258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.