SynthesisMayo Clinic proceedings2012
Molecular techniques for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection: An official clinical practice guideline of the Spanish Society of Chemotherapy (SEQ), Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI) and the working group of Postoperative Infection of the Spanish Society of Anesthesia and Reanimation (SEDAR).Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2020Guideline
- A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) and Algorithms Including NAATs for the Diagnosis ofClinical microbiology reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Accuracy of Xpert Clostridium difficile assay for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: A meta analysis.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Diagnostic test accuracy of glutamate dehydrogenase for Clostridium difficile: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of toxin-positive versus toxin-negative/NAAT-positive Clostridioides difficile infection in South Korea: a single-center retrospective cohort study.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Clostridioides difficile colonization amplification despite limited in-hospital transmission: A modeling study.PLoS medicine · 2026Article
- Innovative nucleic acid detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Gastroenterological Surgery and Management ofJournal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2025Review
- Comparative evaluation of the STANDARD M10 and XpertJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- A Case of Postoperative Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Enterocolitis in an 81-Year-Old Man and Review of the Literature.The American journal of case reports · 2020Review
- Evaluation of the Cost-effectiveness of Infection Control Strategies to Reduce Hospital-Onset Clostridioides difficile Infection.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Updated Management Guidelines forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Interventions to Reduce the Incidence of Hospital-Onset Clostridium difficile Infection: An Agent-Based Modeling Approach to Evaluate Clinical Effectiveness in Adult Acute Care Hospitals.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2018Article
- Simultaneous detection and characterization of toxigenic Clostridium difficile directly from clinical stool specimens.Frontiers of medicine · 2018Article
- Host response to Clostridium difficile infection: Diagnostics and detection.Journal of global antimicrobial resistance · 2016Review
- Clostridium difficile Infection in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Current infectious disease reports · 2016Review
- Clostridium difficile infection: epidemiology, diagnosis and understanding transmission.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2016Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the usefulness of 2 rapid molecular diagnostic techniques, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), in Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of PCR and LAMP in diagnosis of CDI, including studies that used toxigenic culture or cytotoxicity assay as reference standard.
resultsA search of PubMed and CinAHL medical databases yielded 25 PCR studies, including 11,801 samples that met inclusion criteria and 6 heterogeneous studies that evaluated LAMP. With toxigenic culture as a standard, pooled sensitivity was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.94); specificity, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.94-0.95); and diagnostic odds ratio, 378 (95% CI, 260-547). With cytotoxicity as a standard, pooled sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.90); specificity, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.97-0.98); and diagnostic odds ratio, 370 (95% CI, 226-606).
conclusionPolymerase chain reaction is a highly accurate test for identifying CDI. Heterogeneity in LAMP studies did not allow meta-analysis; however, further research into this promising method is warranted.
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.