ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2015
Evaluation of Level of Agreement in Bordetella Species Identification in Three U.S. Laboratories during a Period of Increased Pertussis.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pertussis resurgence: epidemiological trends, pathogenic mechanisms, and preventive strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- StrengtheningJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- A pangenome approach-based loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for the specific and early detection of Bordetella pertussis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Virus Coinfection is a Predictor of Radiologically Confirmed Pneumonia in Children with Bordetella pertussis Infection.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Commercial Assays for Single-Point Diagnosis of Pertussis in the US.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2017Article
- Laboratory-based surveillance of pertussis using multitarget real-time PCR in Japan: evidence for Bordetella pertussis infection in preteens and teens.New microbes and new infections · 2015Article
- Laboratory Diagnosis of Pertussis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Review
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
While PCR is the most common method used for detecting Bordetella pertussis in the United States, most laboratories use insertion sequence 481 (IS481), which is not specific for B. pertussis; therefore, the relative contribution of other Bordetella species is not understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the proportion of other Bordetella species misidentified as B. pertussis during a period of increased pertussis incidence, determine the level of agreement in Bordetella species detection between U.S. commercial laboratories and the CDC, and assess the relative diagnostic sensitivity of CDC's PCR assay when using a different PCR master mix. Specimens collected between May 2012 and May 2013 were tested at two U.S. commercial laboratories for B. pertussis and B. parapertussis detection. Every fifth specimen positive for IS481 and/or IS1001 with cycle threshold (CT) values of ≤35 was sent to CDC for PCR testing that identifies Bordetella species. Specimens with indeterminate or negative results in the CDC PCR were tested using an alternate PCR master mix. Of 755 specimens, there was agreement in species identification for 83.4% (n = 630). Of the specimens with different identifications (n = 125), 79.2% (n = 99) were identified as indeterminate B. pertussis at CDC. Overall, 0.66% (n = 5) of the specimens were identified as B. holmesii or B. bronchiseptica at CDC. Of 115 specimens with indeterminate or negative results, 46.1% (n = 53) were B. pertussis positive when tested by an alternate master mix, suggesting a possible increase in assay sensitivity. This study demonstrates good agreement between the two U.S. commercial laboratories and CDC and little misidentification of Bordetella species during the 2012 U.S. epidemic.
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.