Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20702662›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2010

Comparison of combined nose-throat swabs with nasopharyngeal aspirates for detection of pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus by real-time reverse transcriptase PCR.

Victoria Ortiz de la Tabla, Mar Masiá, Pedro Antequera, Coral Martin, Gregoria Gazquez, Fernando Buñuel, Félix Gutiérrez

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. School-located influenza vaccination decreases laboratory-confirmed influenza and improves school attendance.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2014
    Article
  16. Lower respiratory tract virus findings in mechanically ventilated patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2014
    Article
  17. Observational
  18. Observational
  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

7 authors.

Victoria Ortiz de la TablaMicrobiology Service, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, Alicante, Spain.
Mar Masiá
Pedro Antequera
Coral Martin
Gregoria Gazquez
Fernando Buñuel
Félix Gutiérrez

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data assessing the diagnostic accuracies of use of different respiratory samples for the detection of the novel influenza A/H1N1 2009 virus by molecular methods are lacking. The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of combined nose and throat swabs (CNTS) with that of nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPA). This was a prospective study of adults and children with suspected influenza. Real-time reverse transcriptase PCR testing was used for the virological diagnosis. Of the 2,473 patients included, 264 with paired CNTS and NPA were randomly selected. Novel influenza A/H1N1 virus was identified in at least one sample for 115 (43.6%) patients, the majority of them young adults. In 109 patients (94.8%) the virus was identified in the CNTS, and in 98 (85.2%) it was identified in the NPA (P = 0.02). In 93 patients (80.1%), the virus was identified in both specimens. Spearman's rho correlation coefficient between the two methods was 0.82 (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in accuracy between the specimens when patients were stratified according to demographic or clinical characteristics except in the case of women, in whom the sensitivity of CNTS was higher (P = 0.01). The combination of CNTS and NPA had a significantly higher sensitivity in identifying the virus than did each method alone (P = 0.02 for the comparison of the combination of both sampling methods with CNTS, and P < 0.001 for the comparison with NPA). We conclude that in patients with the novel influenza A/H1N1 virus, the diagnostic yield of CNTS is higher than that of NPA. The combination of both sampling methods increases the likelihood of diagnosing the virus.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfluenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza, HumanMaleMiddle AgedNasopharynxNosePharynx

Identifiers

PMID20702662
PMCPMC2953095

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.