Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21508156›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2011

Comparison of two multiplex methods for detection of respiratory viruses: FilmArray RP and xTAG RVP.

Kenneth H Rand, Howard Rampersaud, Herbert J Houck

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 79 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing 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

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

  1. Multiplex PCR system for the rapid diagnosis of respiratory virus infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Comparison of the Biofire FilmArray Respiratory Panel, Seegene AnyplexII RV16, and Argene for the detection of respiratory viruses.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Kenneth H RandDepartment of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. rand@pathology.ufl.edu
Howard Rampersaud
Herbert J Houck

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We compared the FilmArray RP (Idaho Technology, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT) and the xTAG RVP (Luminex Corporation, Toronto, Canada) multiplex respiratory virus PCR methods for the detection of respiratory viruses in a set of 200 patient specimens frozen at -70 °C after standard viral culture and antigen detection methods were done. Both systems detected between 40 to 50% more viruses than traditional methods, primarily rhinoviruses and human metapneumovirus. The FilmArray RP detected significantly more total viruses either alone or as part of mixed infections than the xTAG RVP, as well as an additional 21.6% more respiratory syncytial viruses. The xTAG RVP requires 5 to 6 h with 2.5 to 3 h of hands-on time, while the FilmArray RP takes about an hour with 3 to 5 min of hands-on time, making it much easier to perform.

Indexed as

HumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesRespiratory Tract DiseasesSensitivity and SpecificityVirologyVirus DiseasesViruses

Identifiers

PMID21508156
PMCPMC3147849

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.