ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2012
A broad range assay for rapid detection and etiologic characterization of bacterial meningitis: performance testing in samples from sub-Sahara.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular diagnostics in cerebrospinal fluid for the diagnosis of central nervous system infections.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Article
- Evaluation of the line probe assay for the rapid detection of bacterial meningitis pathogens in cerebrospinal fluid samples from children.BMC microbiology · 2017Article
- Prevalence of MDR pathogens of bacterial meningitis in Egypt and new synergistic antibiotic combinations.PloS one · 2017Article
- Microwave-accelerated method for ultra-rapid extraction of Neisseria gonorrhoeae DNA for downstream detection.Analytical biochemistry · 2016Article
- Use of quantitative 16S rRNA PCR to determine bacterial load does not augment conventional cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cultures among children undergoing treatment for CSF shunt infection.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to conduct a pilot evaluation of broad-based multiprobe polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in clinical cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples compared to local conventional PCR/culture methods used for bacterial meningitis surveillance. A previously described PCR consisting of initial broad-based detection of Eubacteriales by a universal probe, followed by Gram typing, and pathogen-specific probes was designed targeting variable regions of the 16S rRNA gene. The diagnostic performance of the 16S rRNA assay in ""127 CSF samples was evaluated in samples from patients from Togo, Africa, by comparison to conventional PCR/culture methods. Our probes detected Neisseria meningitidis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Haemophilus influenzae. Uniprobe sensitivity and specificity versus conventional PCR were 100% and 54.6%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of uniprobe versus culture methods were 96.5% and 52.5%, respectively. Gram-typing probes correctly typed 98.8% (82/83) and pathogen-specific probes identified 96.4% (80/83) of the positives. This broad-based PCR algorithm successfully detected and provided species level information for multiple bacterial meningitis agents in clinical samples.
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.