Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23884998›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2013

Survey of culture, goldengate assay, universal biosensor assay, and 16S rRNA Gene sequencing as alternative methods of bacterial pathogen detection.

Brianna Lindsay, Mihai Pop, Martin Antonio, Alan W Walker, Volker Mai, Dilruba Ahmed, Joseph Oundo, Boubou Tamboura, Sandra Panchalingam, Myron M Levine and 42 more

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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

52 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.

Brianna LindsayUniversity of Maryland, School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Mihai Pop
Martin Antonio
Alan W Walker
Volker Mai
Dilruba Ahmed
Joseph Oundo
Boubou Tamboura
Sandra Panchalingam
Myron M Levine
Karen Kotloff
Shan Li
Laurence S Magder
Joseph N Paulson
Bo Liu
Usman Ikumapayi
Chinelo Ebruke
Michel Dione
Mitchell Adeyemi
Richard Rance
Mark D Stares
Maria Ukhanova
Bret Barnes
Ian Lewis
Firoz Ahmed
Meer Taifur Alam
Ruhul Amin
Sabbir Siddiqui
John B Ochieng
Emmanuel Ouma
Jane Juma
Eunice Mailu
Richard Omore
Ciara E O'Reilly
James Hannis
Sheri Manalili
Jonna Deleon
Irene Yasuda
Lawrence Blyn
Raymond Ranken
Feng Li
Roberta Housley
David J Ecker
M Anowar Hossain
Robert F Breiman
J Glenn Morris
Timothy K McDaniel
Julian Parkhill
Debasish Saha
Rangarajan Sampath
O Colin Stine
James P Nataro
Kenya Medical Research Institute · KEUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · USInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research · BDMRC Unit the Gambia · GMWellcome Sanger Institute · GBIllumina (United States) · USUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USCentre Pour le Développement des Vaccins-Mali · MLUniversity of Virginia · US

Funding

Severe Enteric Disease: Pathogenesis and ResponseU19AI090873 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI BOWER, DONNA ADAMS · 2010 to 2014
$7.2M
NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI090873
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cultivation-based assays combined with PCR or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-based methods for finding virulence factors are standard methods for detecting bacterial pathogens in stools; however, with emerging molecular technologies, new methods have become available. The aim of this study was to compare four distinct detection technologies for the identification of pathogens in stools from children under 5 years of age in The Gambia, Mali, Kenya, and Bangladesh. The children were identified, using currently accepted clinical protocols, as either controls or cases with moderate to severe diarrhea. A total of 3,610 stool samples were tested by established clinical culture techniques: 3,179 DNA samples by the Universal Biosensor assay (Ibis Biosciences, Inc.), 1,466 DNA samples by the GoldenGate assay (Illumina), and 1,006 DNA samples by sequencing of 16S rRNA genes. Each method detected different proportions of samples testing positive for each of seven enteric pathogens, enteroaggregative Escherichia coli (EAEC), enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC), Shigella spp., Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella enterica, and Aeromonas spp. The comparisons among detection methods included the frequency of positive stool samples and kappa values for making pairwise comparisons. Overall, the standard culture methods detected Shigella spp., EPEC, ETEC, and EAEC in smaller proportions of the samples than either of the methods based on detection of the virulence genes from DNA in whole stools. The GoldenGate method revealed the greatest agreement with the other methods. The agreement among methods was higher in cases than in controls. The new molecular technologies have a high potential for highly sensitive identification of bacterial diarrheal pathogens.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAfricaBacteriaBacterial InfectionsBacteriological TechniquesBangladeshBiosensing TechniquesChildChild, PreschoolDiarrheaFecesFemaleHumansInfantInfant, Newborn

Identifiers

PMID23884998
PMCPMC3811648
OpenAlexW2143285077

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.