Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23761157›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013

Improved detection of bacterial pathogens in patients presenting with gastroenteritis by use of the EntericBio real-time Gastro Panel I assay.

Monika Koziel, Rachel Kiely, Liam Blake, Isabelle O'Callaghan, Gerard D Corcoran, Brigid Lucey, Roy D Sleator

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Global Epidemiology of Campylobacter Infection.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. A parallel diagnostic accuracy study of three molecular panels for the detection of bacterial gastroenteritis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
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

7 authors.

Monika KozielDepartment of Biological Sciences, Cork Institute of Technology, Bishopstown, Cork, Ireland.
Rachel Kiely
Liam Blake
Isabelle O'Callaghan
Gerard D Corcoran
Brigid Lucey
Roy D Sleator

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the use of EntericBio real-time Gastro Panel I (Serosep, Limerick, Ireland) for routine use in a clinical microbiology laboratory for simultaneous detection of Campylobacter jejuni, coli, and lari, Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC), Salmonella spp., and Shigella spp. in feces. This system differs from its predecessor (the EntericBio Panel II system, Serosep) in that it allows real-time detection of pathogens directly from feces, without pre-enrichment. It also specifically detects Campylobacter jejuni, coli, and lari rather than all Campylobacter species, as is the case with the previous system. A total of 528 samples from patients presenting with acute gastroenteritis were screened prospectively with this assay, and results were compared with those of the current method, which combines screening the samples with a molecular assay (the EntericBio Panel II assay) and retrospective culture of the specimens in which the target was detected. Discrepancy analysis was conducted using culture and molecular methods. The real-time assay produced 84 positive results, specifically, Campylobacter spp. (n=44); Stx1 and/or Stx2 (n=35); Shigella spp. (n=3); and Salmonella spp. (n=6). Of these, 4 samples represented coinfections with Campylobacter spp. and STEC. The real-time assay showed an increased detection rate for pathogens, apart from Salmonella spp. Four Campylobacter-positive and 6 Stx-positive results remained unconfirmed by any other method used. The isolation rates for PCR-positive samples were as follows: Campylobacter spp., 80%; STEC, 45.7%; Salmonella spp., 100%; and Shigella spp., 66.7%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and efficiency were 100%, 97.8%, 88.1%, 100%, and 98.1%, respectively.

Indexed as

BacteriaBacterial InfectionsBacteriological TechniquesFecesGastroenteritisHumansIrelandMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPredictive Value of TestsReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID23761157
PMCPMC3719627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.