ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2013
Evaluation of PCR methods for the diagnosis of pertussis by the European surveillance network for vaccine-preventable diseases (EUVAC.NET).
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The 2024 resurgence ofFrontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Review
- Pertussis in Individuals with Co-morbidities: A Systematic Review.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2021Review
- Follow-Up of External Quality Controls for PCR-Based Diagnosis of Whooping Cough in a Hospital Laboratory Network (Renacoq) and in Other Hospital and Private Laboratories in France.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Comparative Epidemiologic Characteristics of Pertussis in 10 Central and Eastern European Countries, 2000-2013.PloS one · 2016Article
- The estimated incidence of pertussis in people aged 50 years old in the United States, 2006-2010.BMC infectious diseases · 2015Article
- Laboratory Diagnosis of Pertussis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Review
- Harmonization of Bordetella pertussis real-time PCR diagnostics in the United States in 2012.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Evaluation of amplification targets for the specific detection of Bordetella pertussis using real-time polymerase chain reaction.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2014Article
- Comparative evaluation of the Diagenode multiplex PCR assay on the BD max system versus a routine in-house assay for detection of Bordetella pertussis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- Diagnosis of whooping cough in Switzerland: differentiating Bordetella pertussis from Bordetella holmesii by polymerase chain reaction.PloS one · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the performance of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods used for the diagnosis of pertussis in laboratories within Europe in 2011. National reference laboratories in 25 European countries were contacted and a total of 24 laboratories from 19 countries agreed to participate in the study. A panel of seven samples of DNA from Bordetella pertussis, Bordetella parapertussis and Bordetella holmesii plus a negative control were distributed and analysed according to the routine PCR methods in each laboratory. The study took place in 2011. Nineteen laboratories used a real-time PCR approach, four laboratories used block-based PCR and one laboratory used a combination of methods. Six different combinations of amplification targets were used, and ten laboratories tested only for the presence of B. pertussis DNA. All laboratories (24/24) correctly identified a sample with high concentration of B. pertussis DNA, while three misidentified the B. parapertussis DNA as B. pertussis and 15 misidentified the B. holmesii DNA as either B. pertussis or B. parapertussis. There was a wide variation in the methods used for PCR-based diagnosis of pertussis among the European laboratories. Several laboratories were not able to discriminate between DNA samples from different Bordetella species.
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.