ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2014
Molecular identification of clinical "difficult-to-identify" microbes from sequencing 16S ribosomal DNA and internal transcribed spacer 2.
Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Fluoride in Drinking Water on Fecal Microbial Community in Rats.Biological trace element research · 2022Article
- SpontaneousClinical case reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Differences in pathogenicity of three animal isolates of Mycobacterium species in a mouse model.PloS one · 2017Article
- leBIBIQBPP: a set of databases and a webtool for automatic phylogenetic analysis of prokaryotic sequences.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Ibrutinib-associated cutaneous mucormycosis due to anTherapeutic advances in infectious diseaseArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical microbiology laboratories have to accurately identify clinical microbes. However, some isolates are difficult to identify by the automated biochemical text platforms, which are called "difficult-to-identify" microbes in this study. Therefore, the ability of 16S ribosomal DNA (16S rDNA) and internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) sequencing to identify these "difficult-to-identify" bacteria and fungi was assessed in this study.
methodsSamples obtained from a teaching hospital over the past three years were examined. The 16S rDNA of four standard strains, 18 clinical common isolates, and 47 "difficult-to-identify" clinical bacteria were amplified by PCR and sequenced. The ITS2 of eight standard strains and 31 "difficult-to-identify" clinical fungi were also amplified by PCR and sequenced. The sequences of 16S rDNA and ITS2 were compared to reference data available in GenBank by using the BLASTN program. These microbes were identified according to the percentage of similarity to reference sequences of strains in GenBank.
resultsThe results from molecular sequencing methods correlated well with automated microbiological identification systems for common clinical isolates. Sequencing results of the standard strains were consistent with their known phenotype. Overall, 47 "difficult-to-identify" clinical bacteria were identified as 35 genera or species by sequence analysis (with 10 of these identified isolates first reported in clinical specimens in China and two first identified in the international literature). 31 "difficult-to-identify" clinical fungi tested could be identified as 15 genera or species by sequence analysis (with two of these first reported in China).
conclusionsOur results show the importance of 16S rDNA and internal ITS2 sequencing for the molecular identification of "difficult-to-identify" bacteria and fungi. The development of this method with advantages of convenience, availability, and cost-effectiveness will make it worth extending into clinical practice in developing countries.
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.