ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013
Detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by a duplex droplet digital PCR assay.
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 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.
- ΔCt-informed, calibrated logistic regression accurately attributesMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Comparison ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Rapid and sensitive detection of methicillin-resistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Multiplex Digital PCR-Based Development and discussion of the Detection of Genetic Association BetweenInfection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- A duplex droplet digital PCR assay for absolute quantification and characterization of long self-amplifying RNA.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Antibiofilm effect of melittin alone and in combination with conventional antibiotics toward strong biofilm of MDR-MRSA and -Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Development and clinical validation of a droplet digital PCR assay for detecting Acinetobacter baumannii and Klebsiella pneumoniae in patients with suspected bloodstream infections.MicrobiologyOpen · 2021Article
- Droplet microfluidics for high-sensitivity and high-throughput detection and screening of disease biomarkers.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2018Review
- In vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods: agar dilution to 3D tissue-engineered models.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Review
- Digital PCR for Detection and Quantification of Fluoroquinolone Resistance in Legionella pneumophila.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Article
- Three-color crystal digital PCR.Biomolecular detection and quantification · 2016Article
- Evaluation of the performance of quantitative detection of the Listeria monocytogenes prfA locus with droplet digital PCR.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2016Article
- Biodegradation of phthalic acid esters by a newly isolated Mycobacterium sp. YC-RL4 and the bioprocess with environmental samples.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016Article
- Assessment of the real-time PCR and different digital PCR platforms for DNA quantification.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2016Article
- Can Nasal Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Screening Be Used to Avoid Empiric Vancomycin Use in Intra-Abdominal Infection?Surgical infections · 2015Article
- Standardization of Nucleic Acid Tests for Clinical Measurements of Bacteria and Viruses.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Review
- Comparison of droplet digital PCR and quantitative real-time PCR inBiotechnology reports (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2014Article
- Emerging technologies for the clinical microbiology laboratory.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2014Review
- Evolution of microbiological analytical methods for dairy industry needs.Frontiers in microbiology · 2014Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Health care-associated infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) contribute to significant hospitalization costs. We report here a droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assay, which is a next-generation emulsion-based endpoint PCR assay for high-precision MRSA analysis. Reference cultures of MRSA, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), and confounders were included as controls. Copan swabs were used to sample cultures and collect specimens for analysis from patients at a large teaching hospital. Swab extraction and cell lysis were accomplished using magnetic-driven agitation of silica beads. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) (Roche Light Cycler 480) and ddPCR (Bio-Rad QX100 droplet digital PCR system) assays were used to detect genes for the staphylococcal protein SA0140 (SA) and the methicillin resistance (mecA) gene employing standard TaqMan chemistries. Both qPCR and ddPCR assays correctly identified culture controls for MRSA (76), MSSA (12), and confounder organisms (36) with 100% sensitivity and specificity. Analysis of the clinical samples (211 negative and 186 positive) collected during a study of MRSA nasal carriage allowed direct comparison of the qPCR and ddPCR assays to the Cepheid MRSA GeneXpert assay. A total of 397 clinical samples were examined in this study. Cepheid MRSA GeneXpert values were used to define negative and positive samples. Both the qPCR and ddPCR assays were in good agreement with the reference assay. The sensitivities for the qPCR and ddPCR assays were 96.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.1 to 98.5%) and 96.8% (95% CI, 93.1 to 98.5%), respectively. Both the qPCR and ddPCR assays had specificities of 91.9% (95% CI, 87.5 to 94.9%) for qPCR and 91.0% (95% CI, 86.4 to 94.2%) for ddPCR technology.
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.