Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22518864›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012

Performance of the cobas CT/NG test compared to the Aptima AC2 and Viper CTQ/GCQ assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.

Barbara Van Der Pol, Oliver Liesenfeld, James A Williams, Stephanie N Taylor, Rebecca A Lillis, Barbara A Body, Mindy Nye, Carol Eisenhut, Edward W Hook

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A novel commensalJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Detection ofSexually transmitted infections · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

9 authors.

Barbara Van Der PolIndiana University School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Bloomington, Indiana, USA. bvanderp@indiana.edu
Oliver Liesenfeld
James A Williams
Stephanie N Taylor
Rebecca A Lillis
Barbara A Body
Mindy Nye
Carol Eisenhut
Edward W Hook

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The next-generation amplification test for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (Roche cobas 4800), a fully automated system, was compared head to head, using female samples, to Gen-Probe Aptima Combo 2 and BD ProbeTec using Viper. Endocervical swabs, female urine, and endocervical samples in liquid-based cytology medium were run on at least two of three platforms. A total of 4,316 samples were evaluated, and 281 chlamydial and 69 gonococcal infections were identified. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were obtained relative to the patient infection standard (PIS) and using latent class analysis (LCA). Chlamydia sensitivity estimates ranged from 86.9 to 95.6% using PIS and 97.6 to 98% using LCA. Specificity was ≥ 99.6% for all sample types. Sensitivity ranged from 95.6 to 100% using PIS and 96.9 to 100% using LCA for the detection of gonococcal infections. Specificity for gonococcal infections was ≥ 99.8%. cobas 4800 performance was equivalent to the comparator assays (all P values, >0.05), and the fully automated system provides high laboratory efficiency.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBacteriological TechniquesCervix UteriChlamydia trachomatisFemaleGonorrheaHumansLymphogranuloma VenereumMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNeisseria gonorrhoeaeSensitivity and SpecificityUrineYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID22518864
PMCPMC3405604

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.