Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23804384›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013

Blind evaluation of the microwave-accelerated metal-enhanced fluorescence ultrarapid and sensitive Chlamydia trachomatis test by use of clinical samples.

Johan H Melendez, Jill S Huppert, Mary Jett-Goheen, Elizabeth A Hesse, Nicole Quinn, Charlotte A Gaydos, Chris D Geddes

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation 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 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Current and Future Trends in the Laboratory Diagnosis of Sexually Transmitted Infections.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  10. Progress and Perspectives in Point of Care Testing for Urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis Infection: A Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Johan H MelendezInstitute of Fluorescence and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Jill S Huppert
Mary Jett-Goheen
Elizabeth A Hesse
Nicole Quinn
Charlotte A Gaydos
Chris D Geddes
Johns Hopkins University · USCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore County · US

Funding

TrainingU54EB007958 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Yukari C Manabe, Susan Anne Tuddenham · 2007 to 2026
$34.6M
EXPAND PARTICIPATION BY MINORITIES IN BIOMEDICAL SCIENCER25GM055036 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY · PI SUMMERS, MICHAEL FINLEY · 1996 to 2021
$16.9M
Graduate Training at The Chemistry Biology InterfaceT32GM066706 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY · PI SELEY-RADTKE, KATHERINE L, SMITH, AARON T · 2004 to 2023
$3.3M
NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB007958NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM055036NIGMS NIH HHS R25 GM55036NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM066706NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM66706
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate point-of-care (POC) diagnostic tests for Chlamydia trachomatis infection are urgently needed for the rapid treatment of patients. In a blind comparative study, we evaluated microwave-accelerated metal-enhanced fluorescence (MAMEF) assays for ultrafast and sensitive detection of C. trachomatis DNA from vaginal swabs. The results of two distinct MAMEF assays were compared to those of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). The first assay targeted the C. trachomatis 16S rRNA gene, and the second assay targeted the C. trachomatis cryptic plasmid. Using pure C. trachomatis, the MAMEF assays detected as few as 10 inclusion-forming units/ml of C. trachomatis in less than 9 min, including DNA extraction and detection. A total of 257 dry vaginal swabs from 245 female adolescents aged 14 to 22 years were analyzed. Swabs were eluted with water, the solutions were lysed to release and to fragment genomic DNA, and MAMEF-based DNA detection was performed. The prevalence of C. trachomatis by NAATs was 17.5%. Of the 45 samples that were C. trachomatis positive and the 212 samples that were C. trachomatis negative by NAATs, 33/45 and 197/212 were correctly identified by the MAMEF assays if both assays were required to be positive (sensitivity, 73.3%; specificity, 92.9%). Using the plasmid-based assay alone, 37/45 C. trachomatis-positive and 197/212 C. trachomatis-negative samples were detected (sensitivity, 82.2%; specificity, 92.9%). Using the 16S rRNA assay alone, 34/45 C. trachomatis-positive and 197/212 C. trachomatis-negative samples were detected (sensitivity, 75.5%; specificity, 92.9%). The overall rates of agreement with NAAT results for the individual 16S rRNA and cryptic plasmid assays were 89.5% and 91.0%, respectively. Given the sensitivity, specificity, and rapid detection of the plasmid-based assay, the plasmid-based MAMEF assay appears to be suited for clinical POC testing.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsAdolescentBacteriological TechniquesChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisDNA, BacterialFemaleFluorescenceHumansMetalsMicrowavesMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPlasmidsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsDNA, BacterialMetalsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID23804384
PMCPMC3754671
OpenAlexW2019647875

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.