Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22644053›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2012

Performance of a novel microarray multiplex PCR for the detection of 23 respiratory pathogens (SYMP-ARI study).

S Bierbaum, N Königsfeld, N Besazza, K Blessing, G Rücker, U Kontny, R Berner, M Schumacher, J Forster, V Falcone and 6 more

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Nucleic acid amplification tests on respiratory samples for the diagnosis of coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The use of multiplex PCR for the diagnosis of viral severe acute respiratory infection in children: a high rate of co-detection during the winter season.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2016
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

16 authors.

S BierbaumDepartment of Virology, Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, University Medical Center Freiburg, Hermann-Herder Str. 11, 79104 Freiburg, Germany.
N Königsfeld
N Besazza
K Blessing
G Rücker
U Kontny
R Berner
M Schumacher
J Forster
V Falcone
C van de Sand
A Essig
D Huzly
G Rohde
D Neumann-Haefelin
M Panning

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Symptoms of acute febrile respiratory tract infection are often unspecific, but the rapid identification of pathogens allows optimised patient management. The objective of this study was to evaluate a novel multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) suspension microarray which detects 19 viral and four atypical bacterial targets. A comprehensive set of sensitive monoplex real-time PCR assays was used for each pathogen as the gold standard. A panel of archived as well as 300 prospectively collected clinical samples was analysed by both methods. At least one target was detected in 165/300 (55 %) samples by monoplex PCR and in 140/300 (46 %) samples by multiplex PCR, respectively. The positivity rate was significantly higher in paediatric patients compared to adults [126/154 (82 %) vs. 39/146 (27 %) by monoplex and 114/154 (74 %) vs. 26/146 (18 %) by multiplex PCR, respectively]. Among all samples, 17/300 (5.6 %) were positive for atypical bacteria by monoplex and 8/300 (2.6 %) by multiplex PCR, respectively. Multiple detections were recorded in 35/300 (11.6 %) samples by monoplex and 26/300 (8.7 %) by multiplex PCR. For the most common pathogens, the sensitivity ranged from 57 to 93 % and the specificity ranged from 95 to 100 %. The overall concordance between both methods was 77 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 72-81 %]. False-negative results by multiplex PCR were mainly due to the low target concentration. Compared to monoplex PCR, the novel microarray assay proved its principle but displayed overall lower sensitivities, potentially restricting its use to paediatric patients. For some targets, only small numbers of positive samples were available, requiring larger studies to firmly assess the sensitivity and specificity.

Indexed as

AdultBacteriaBacterial InfectionsChildChild, PreschoolConfidence IntervalsHumansInfantMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionNasopharyngeal DiseasesNasopharynxOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityStatistics, Nonparametric

Identifiers

PMID22644053
PMCPMC7087590

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.