ReviewEnfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica2012
[Mass spectrometry in the clinical microbiology laboratory].
Review in Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of MALDI-TOF VITEK MS for rapid and efficient identification of KPC-type carbapenemases in Enterobacterales carrying the Tn4401a transposon.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Article
- Concordance analysis between different methodologies used for identification of oral isolates ofColombia medica (Cali, Colombia) · 2018Article
- Complexes of silver(I) ions and silver phosphate nanoparticles with hyaluronic acid and/or chitosan as promising antimicrobial agents for vascular grafts.International journal of molecular sciences · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infectious diseases are still a cause of high mortality and morbidity rates. Current microbiological diagnostic methods are based on culture and phenotypic identification of isolated microorganisms, which can be obtained in about 24-48 h. Given that the microbiological identification is of major importance for patient management, new diagnostic methods are needed in order to detect and identify microorganisms in a timely and accurate manner. Over the last few years, several molecular techniques based on the amplification of microbial nucleic acids have been developed with the aim of reducing the time needed for the identification of the microorganisms involved in different infectious processes. On the other hand, mass spectrometry has emerged as a rapid and consistent alternative to conventional methods for microorganism identification. This review describes the most widely used mass spectrometry technologies -matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) and electrospray ionization time-of-flight (ESI-TOF)-, both for protein and nucleic acid analysis, as well as the commercial platforms available. Related publications of most interest in clinical microbiology are also reviewed.
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.