ArticleBMC microbiology2014
Microbiological diagnostic procedures for respiratory cystic fibrosis samples in Spain: towards standard of care practices.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2014. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and microbiological profile of chronic Burkholderia cepacia complex infections in a cystic fibrosis reference hospital in Brazil.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Article
- Brazilian guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of cystic fibrosis.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e TisilogiaArticle
- A practical molecular identification of nonfermenting Gram-negative bacteria from cystic fibrosis.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe microbiological procedures for cystic fibrosis (CF) samples of 17 participating Spanish centers were examined to verify their compliance with current international and national guidelines and to implement the best standards of care for microbiology practices. A 47-item questionnaire covering different CF microbiology aspects was sent to participant laboratories. Telephone interviews were performed when necessary. Data about samples processing for bacteria, mycobacteria and fungi were collected.
resultsGene sequencing (71%), MALDI-TOF (59%) or both (94%) were available for most laboratories. Susceptibility testing was performed by automated microdilution systems (94%) and manual diffusion methods (59%). However, a low use of selective media for Staphylococcus aureus (59%) and Burkholderia cepacia complex (71%), and of epidemiological typing methods (41%) was reported.
conclusionsMost Spanish laboratories are in agreement with consensus guidelines for the processing of CF respiratory samples, but need to improve in the use of specific selective media and typing methods for epidemiologic studies.
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.