ArticlePloS one2015
Use of 16S rRNA gene for identification of a broad range of clinically relevant bacterial pathogens.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 179 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
179 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 453 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and clonal diversity of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae causing neonatal infections: A systematic review of 128 articles across 30 countries.PLoS medicine · 2023Pooled it
- The Human Microbiota and Obesity: A Literature Systematic Review of In Vivo Models and Technical Approaches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Pooled it
- Molecular Characterization of vanA and blaMolecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Clinical impact of 16S rRNA RC-PCR NGS on infectious disease management.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Pipettes and Pipelines: The Weapons of Omics Sciences for a New Age of Clinical Studies.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Complete genome sequence of Streptococcus lingualis isolated from subgingival biofilm.BMC genomic data · 2026Article
- A Comparison of the Gut Microbiome of Two Sympatric Macropods Along an Urbanisation Gradient in Tasmania.Environmental microbiology reports · 2026Article
- Complete genome sequence of Streptococcus sp. strain KHUD_013 isolated from the human buccal mucosa.BMC genomic data · 2026Article
- Assessment of water quality and microbial contamination in Santa Marta's major rivers using conventional methods and next-generation sequencing.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2026Article
- Complete genome sequence of Streptococcus shenyangsis isolated from buccal mucosa.BMC genomic data · 2026Article
- Retrospective Molecular Detection and Characterization of PathogenicTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
- Article
- Unveiling the gut connection: Exploring the link between microbiota and type 1 diabetes onset in pediatric patients.Biomedical reports · 2026Article
- Effects of salinity and broad-range antibiotics on oxalate production, transport, and degradation in Poecilia latipinna.PloS one · 2026Article
- Modified string test to improve and confirm by molecular characterization for bacterial identification.Access microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Molecular and phylogenetic characterization of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from primary pyoderma in a goat from tropical India: an emerging zoonotic threat.Veterinary research communications · 2025Article
- Benchmarking Cost-Effective DNA Extraction Kits for Diverse Metagenomic Samples.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- PTA-DFS study: design of a randomised controlled trial assessing the effects of early percutaneous transluminal angioplasty on the healing of diabetic foot ulcers in persons with type 2 diabetes.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- A resurrected ancestor of Cas12a expands target access and substrate recognition for nucleic acid editing and detection.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
119 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
According to World Health Organization statistics of 2011, infectious diseases remain in the top five causes of mortality worldwide. However, despite sophisticated research tools for microbial detection, rapid and accurate molecular diagnostics for identification of infection in humans have not been extensively adopted. Time-consuming culture-based methods remain to the forefront of clinical microbial detection. The 16S rRNA gene, a molecular marker for identification of bacterial species, is ubiquitous to members of this domain and, thanks to ever-expanding databases of sequence information, a useful tool for bacterial identification. In this study, we assembled an extensive repository of clinical isolates (n = 617), representing 30 medically important pathogenic species and originally identified using traditional culture-based or non-16S molecular methods. This strain repository was used to systematically evaluate the ability of 16S rRNA for species level identification. To enable the most accurate species level classification based on the paucity of sequence data accumulated in public databases, we built a Naïve Bayes classifier representing a diverse set of high-quality sequences from medically important bacterial organisms. We show that for species identification, a model-based approach is superior to an alignment based method. Overall, between 16S gene based and clinical identities, our study shows a genus-level concordance rate of 96% and a species-level concordance rate of 87.5%. We point to multiple cases of probable clinical misidentification with traditional culture based identification across a wide range of gram-negative rods and gram-positive cocci as well as common gram-negative cocci.
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.