ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2011
Comparison of strain typing results for Clostridium difficile isolates from North America.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Utilizing rapid multiple-locus variable-number tandem-repeat analysis typing to aid control of hospital-acquired Clostridium difficile Infection: a multicenter study.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2012Trial
- Decreased cure and increased recurrence rates for Clostridium difficile infection caused by the epidemic C. difficile BI strain.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2012Trial
- A Colombian strain ofVirulence · 2025Article
- History and Evolution of the HypervirulentMicroorganisms · 2025Review
- Molecular epidemiology and clinical characteristics of Clostridioides difficile infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease from a teaching hospital.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Article
- Article
- Temporal Variations in Patterns ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Biographical Feature: Fred C. Tenover, Ph.D., D(ABMM), F(AAM), FIDSA.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- Functional analyses of epidemic Clostridioides difficile toxin B variants reveal their divergence in utilizing receptors and inducing pathology.PLoS pathogens · 2021Article
- The Relative Role of Toxins A and B in the Virulence ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Biological characteristics associated with virulence inEmerging microbes & infections · 2020Article
- Review
- A Review of Mixed StrainFrontiers in microbiology · 2019Review
- Article
- Epidemiological and genomic characterization of community-acquired Clostridium difficile infections.BMC infectious diseases · 2018Article
- Whole-genome analysis reveals the evolution and transmission of an MDR DH/NAP11/106 Clostridium difficile clone in a paediatric hospital.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2018Article
- Comparative genomics analysis of Clostridium difficile epidemic strain DH/NAP11/106.Microbes and infection · 2018Article
- Complete Genome Sequence ofGenome announcements · 2017Article
- Probiotic Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745 prevents outbreak-associated Clostridium difficile-associated cecal inflammation in hamsters.American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate strain typing is critical for understanding the changing epidemiology of Clostridium difficile infections. We typed 350 isolates of toxigenic C. difficile from 2008 to 2009 from seven laboratories in the United States and Canada. Typing was performed by PCR-ribotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) of whole-cell DNA. The Cepheid Xpert C. difficile test for presumptive identification of 027/NAP1/BI isolates was also tested directly on original stool samples. Of 350 isolates, 244 (70%) were known PCR ribotypes, 224 (68%) were 1 of 8 common REA groups, and 187 (54%) were known PFGE types. Eighty-four isolates typed as 027, NAP1, and BI, and 83 of these were identified as presumptive 027/NAP1/BI by Xpert C. difficile. Eight additional isolates were called presumptive 027/NAP1/BI by Xpert C. difficile, of which three were ribotype 027. Five PCR ribotypes contained multiple REA groups, and three North American pulsed-field (NAP) profiles contained both multiple REA groups and PCR ribotypes. There was modest concordance of results among the three methods for C. difficile strains, including the J strain (ribotype 001 and PFGE NAP2), the toxin A-negative 017 strain (PFGE NAP9 and REA type CF), the 078 animal strain (PFGE NAP7 and REA type BK), and type 106 (PFGE NAP11 and REA type DH). PCR-ribotyping, REA, and PFGE provide different but overlapping patterns of strain clustering. Unlike the other methods, the Xpert C. difficile 027/NAP1/BI assay gave results directly from stool specimens, required only 45 min to complete, but was limited to detection of a single strain type.
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.