Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23339355›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2013

Accuracy of real-time PCR, Gram stain and culture for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Neisseria meningitidis and Haemophilus influenzae meningitis diagnosis.

Henry M Wu, Soraia M Cordeiro, Brian H Harcourt, Mariadaglorias Carvalho, Jailton Azevedo, Tainara Q Oliveira, Mariela C Leite, Katia Salgado, Mitermayer G Reis, Brian D Plikaytis and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 155 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Molecular detection and serotyping of acute bacterial meningitis pathogens in Indian children.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Henry M WuDivision of Bacterial Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA. hmwu@emory.edu
Soraia M Cordeiro
Brian H Harcourt
Mariadaglorias Carvalho
Jailton Azevedo
Tainara Q Oliveira
Mariela C Leite
Katia Salgado
Mitermayer G Reis
Brian D Plikaytis
Thomas A Clark
Leonard W Mayer
Albert I Ko
Stacey W Martin
Joice N Reis
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases · USFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRUniversidade Federal da Bahia · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture is the diagnostic reference standard for bacterial meningitis, its sensitivity is limited, particularly when antibiotics were previously administered. CSF Gram staining and real-time PCR are theoretically less affected by antibiotics; however, it is difficult to evaluate these tests with an imperfect reference standard. METHODS AND

findingsCSF from patients with suspected meningitis from Salvador, Brazil were tested with culture, Gram stain, and real-time PCR using S. pneumoniae, N. meningitidis, and H. influenzae specific primers and probes. An antibiotic detection disk bioassay was used to test for the presence of antibiotic activity in CSF. The diagnostic accuracy of tests were evaluated using multiple methods, including direct evaluation of Gram stain and real-time PCR against CSF culture, evaluation of real-time PCR against a composite reference standard, and latent class analysis modeling to evaluate all three tests simultaneously.

resultsAmong 451 CSF specimens, 80 (17.7%) had culture isolation of one of the three pathogens (40 S. pneumoniae, 36 N. meningitidis, and 4 H. influenzae), and 113 (25.1%) were real-time PCR positive (51 S. pneumoniae, 57 N. meningitidis, and 5 H. influenzae). Compared to culture, real-time PCR sensitivity and specificity were 95.0% and 90.0%, respectively. In a latent class analysis model, the sensitivity and specificity estimates were: culture, 81.3% and 99.7%; Gram stain, 98.2% and 98.7%; and real-time PCR, 95.7% and 94.3%, respectively. Gram stain and real-time PCR sensitivity did not change significantly when there was antibiotic activity in the CSF.

conclusionReal-time PCR and Gram stain were highly accurate in diagnosing meningitis caused by S. pneumoniae, N. meningitidis, and H. influenzae, though there were few cases of H. influenzae. Furthermore, real-time PCR and Gram staining were less affected by antibiotic presence and might be useful when antibiotics were previously administered. Gram staining, which is inexpensive and commonly available, should be encouraged in all clinical settings.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCerebrospinal FluidChildChild, PreschoolGentian VioletHaemophilus influenzaeHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMeningitis, BacterialMiddle AgedNeisseria meningitidisPhenazinesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionGentian VioletGram's stainPhenazines

Identifiers

PMID23339355
PMCPMC3558362
OpenAlexW1991290798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.