ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015
Multicenter clinical evaluation of the Xpert GBS LB assay for detection of group B Streptococcus in prenatal screening specimens.
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 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid tests for detecting group B streptococcus colonization in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
- Establishment and characterization of a genomic DNA reference material for Group B Streptococcus detection.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- PhenoMATRIX™ for the screening of Group B Streptococcus (GBS) carriage in pregnant women: ready to get rid of the LIM broth?European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Article
- Comparison of self-collected and healthcare worker-collected rectovaginal swabs for group B streptococcus detection in pregnancy using PCR with a commercial collection-enrichment device.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Rapid Point-of-care Testing to Inform Intrapartum Treatment of Group BOpen forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Comparison of the Simplexa GBS Direct and ARIES GBS assays for the detection ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Multicenter Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert GBS LB XC Test.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Article
- Metabolic preference assay for rapid diagnosis of bloodstream infections.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Group B Streptococcal Neonatal Meningitis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- Assessing standards for prevention of early onset group B streptococcal (GBS) disease in Ireland.Irish journal of medical science · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Xpert GBS assay and Xpert GBS LB assay for detection of Streptococcus agalactiae.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2021Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Various Methodologies for Group B SFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- American Society for Microbiology Provides 2020 Guidelines for Detection and Identification of Group BJournal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Comparison of Three Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests and Culture for Detection of Group BJournal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Article
- Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae?BMC infectious diseases · 2019Article
- Multicenter Diagnostic Accuracy Evaluation of the Luminex Aries Real-Time PCR Assay for Group B Streptococcus Detection in Lim Broth-Enriched Samples.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Comparison of qPCR and culture methods for group B Streptococcus colonization detection in pregnant women: evaluation of a new qPCR assay.BMC infectious diseases · 2018Article
- Intrapartum group B Streptococcus screening in the labor ward by Xpert® GBS real-time PCR.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neonatal infection with Streptococcus agalactiae (group B Streptococcus [GBS]) is a leading cause of sepsis and meningitis in newborns. Recent guidelines have recommended universal screening of all pregnant women to identify those colonized with GBS and administration of peripartum prophylaxis to those identified as carriers to reduce the risk of early-onset GBS disease in neonates. Enriched culture methods are the current standard for prenatal GBS screening; however, the implementation of more sensitive molecular diagnostic tests may be able to further reduce the risk of early-onset GBS infection. We report a clinical evaluation of the Xpert GBS LB assay, a molecular diagnostic test for the identification of GBS from broth-enriched vaginal/rectal specimens obtained during routine prenatal screening. A total of 826 specimens were collected from women undergoing prenatal screening (35 to 37 weeks' gestation) and tested at one of three clinical centers. Each swab specimen was tested directly prior to enrichment using the Xpert GBS assay. Following 18 to 24 h of broth enrichment, each specimen was tested using the Xpert GBS LB assay and the FDA-cleared Smart GBS assay as a molecular diagnostic comparator. Results obtained using all three molecular tests were compared to those for broth-enriched culture as the gold standard. The sensitivity and specificity of the Xpert GBS LB assay were 99.0% and 92.4%, respectively, compared to those for the gold standard culture. The Smart GBS molecular test demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 96.8% and 95.5%, respectively. The sensitivities of the two broth-enriched molecular methods were superior to those for direct testing of specimens using the Xpert GBS assay, which demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 85.7% and 96.2%, respectively.
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.