ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
Aerosolized vaccine as an unexpected source of false-positive Bordetella pertussis PCR results.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Caught in a trap: DNA contamination in tsetse xenomonitoring can lead to over-estimates of Trypanosoma brucei infection.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Meaningful Endpoints for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) Clinical Trials: Emphasis on 'Feels, Functions, Survives'. Report of a Collaborative Discussion in a Symposium with Direct Engagement from Representatives of Patients, Investigators, the National Institutes of Health, a Patient Advocacy Organization, and a Regulatory Agency.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2024Article
- Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of the Automated AriesJournal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Article
- Laboratory Diagnosis of Pertussis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Review
- Diagnostic molecular microbiology: a 2013 snapshot.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2013Review
- Towards improved accuracy of Bordetella pertussis nucleic acid amplification tests.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When 13 of 13 nasal wash specimens from a single pediatrician's office tested positive for low quantities of Bordetella pertussis DNA, we suspected prelaboratory contamination. Investigation revealed that Pentacel and Adacel vaccines contain high copy numbers of B. pertussis DNA, which can be aerosolized, causing false-positive B. pertussis PCR results.
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.