Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24740081›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2014

Workflow and maintenance characteristics of five automated laboratory instruments for the diagnosis of sexually transmitted infections.

Sam Ratnam, Dan Jang, Jodi Gilchrist, Marek Smieja, Andre Poirier, Todd Hatchette, Jean-Frederic Flandin, Max Chernesky

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Sam RatnamDivision of Community Health and Humanities, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Dan JangSt. Joseph's Healthcare/McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jodi GilchristSt. Joseph's Healthcare/McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Marek SmiejaSt. Joseph's Healthcare/McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Andre PoirierCentre de santé et de services sociaux de Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Quebec, Canada.
Todd HatchetteQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Jean-Frederic FlandinPublic Health Laboratory, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
Max CherneskySt. Joseph's Healthcare/McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada chernesk@mcmaster.ca.
McMaster University · CACentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Mauricie-et-du-Centre-du-Québec · CAMemorial University of Newfoundland · CAQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre · CASt. John’s Health Sciences Centre · CASt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The choice of a suitable automated system for a diagnostic laboratory depends on various factors. Comparative workflow studies provide quantifiable and objective metrics to determine hands-on time during specimen handling and processing, reagent preparation, return visits and maintenance, and test turnaround time and throughput. Using objective time study techniques, workflow characteristics for processing 96 and 192 tests were determined on m2000 RealTime (Abbott Molecular), Viper XTR (Becton Dickinson), cobas 4800 (Roche Molecular Diagnostics), Tigris (Hologic Gen-Probe), and Panther (Hologic Gen-Probe) platforms using second-generation assays for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. A combination of operational and maintenance steps requiring manual labor showed that Panther had the shortest overall hands-on times and Viper XTR the longest. Both Panther and Tigris showed greater efficiency whether 96 or 192 tests were processed. Viper XTR and Panther had the shortest times to results and m2000 RealTime the longest. Sample preparation and loading time was the shortest for Panther and longest for cobas 4800. Mandatory return visits were required only for m2000 RealTime and cobas 4800 when 96 tests were processed, and both required substantially more hands-on time than the other systems due to increased numbers of return visits when 192 tests were processed. These results show that there are substantial differences in the amount of labor required to operate each system. Assay performance, instrumentation, testing capacity, workflow, maintenance, and reagent costs should be considered in choosing a system.

Indexed as

WorkflowAutomation, LaboratoryChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisDiagnostic Tests, RoutineGonorrheaHumansMaintenanceNeisseria gonorrhoeaeTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24740081
PMCPMC4097743
OpenAlexW2097928303

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.