ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013
PCR-reverse blot hybridization assay for screening and identification of pathogens in sepsis.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and Characteristics of Onychomycosis in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Single-centre Prospective Cross-sectional Study.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2021Article
- Microbial Infections as a Trigger for Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Review
- Prediction of Y haplogroup by polymerase chain reaction-reverse blot hybridization assay.Genes & genomics · 2019Article
- Evaluation of PCR-reverse blot hybridization assay, REBA Sepsis-ID test, for simultaneous identification of bacterial pathogens and mecA and van genes from blood culture bottles.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2014Article
- The potential for PCR based testing to improve diagnosis and treatment of sepsis.Current infectious disease reports · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid and accurate identification of the pathogens involved in bloodstream infections is crucial for the prompt initiation of appropriate therapy, as this can decrease morbidity and mortality rates. A PCR-reverse blot hybridization assay for sepsis, the reverse blot hybridization assay (REBA) Sepsis-ID test, was developed; it uses pan-probes to distinguish Gram-positive and -negative bacteria and fungi. In addition, the assay was designed to identify bacteria and fungi using six genus-specific and 13 species-specific probes; it uses additional probes for antibiotic resistance genes, i.e., the mecA gene of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and the vanA and vanB genes of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). The REBA Sepsis-ID test successfully identified clinical isolates and blood culture samples as containing Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria, or fungi. The results matched those obtained with conventional microbiological methods. For the REBA Sepsis-ID test, of the 115 blood culture samples tested, 47 (40.8%) and 49 (42.6%) samples were identified to the species and genus levels, respectively, and the remaining 19 samples (16.5%), which included five Gram-positive rods, were identified as Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria, or fungi. The antibiotic resistances of the MRSA and VRE strains were identified using both conventional microbiological methods and the REBA Sepsis-ID test. In conclusion, the REBA Sepsis-ID test developed for this study is a fast and reliable test for the identification of Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria, fungi, and antibiotic resistance genes (including mecA for MRSA and the vanA and vanB genes for VRE) in bloodstream infections.
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.