ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015
DNA microarray-based PCR ribotyping of Clostridium difficile.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Usefulness of Capillary Gel Electrophoresis-Based PCR for Detection ofGels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Solid-Phase Cell-Free Protein Synthesis and Its Applications in Biotechnology.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2023Article
- Tube-Wise Diagnostic Microarray for the Multiplex Characterization of the Complex Plant PathogenFrontiers in plant science · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a DNA microarray-based assay for fast and simple PCR ribotyping of Clostridium difficile strains. Hybridization probes were designed to query the modularly structured intergenic spacer region (ISR), which is also the template for conventional and PCR ribotyping with subsequent capillary gel electrophoresis (seq-PCR) ribotyping. The probes were derived from sequences available in GenBank as well as from theoretical ISR module combinations. A database of reference hybridization patterns was set up from a collection of 142 well-characterized C. difficile isolates representing 48 seq-PCR ribotypes. The reference hybridization patterns calculated by the arithmetic mean were compared using a similarity matrix analysis. The 48 investigated seq-PCR ribotypes revealed 27 array profiles that were clearly distinguishable. The most frequent human-pathogenic ribotypes 001, 014/020, 027, and 078/126 were discriminated by the microarray. C. difficile strains related to 078/126 (033, 045/FLI01, 078, 126, 126/FLI01, 413, 413/FLI01, 598, 620, 652, and 660) and 014/020 (014, 020, and 449) showed similar hybridization patterns, confirming their genetic relatedness, which was previously reported. A panel of 50 C. difficile field isolates was tested by seq-PCR ribotyping and the DNA microarray-based assay in parallel. Taking into account that the current version of the microarray does not discriminate some closely related seq-PCR ribotypes, all isolates were typed correctly. Moreover, seq-PCR ribotypes without reference profiles available in the database (ribotype 009 and 5 new types) were correctly recognized as new ribotypes, confirming the performance and expansion potential of the microarray.
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.