ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2015
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry for the identification of beta-hemolytic streptococci.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Performance of the matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry system for rapid identification of streptococci: a review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMatrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has emerged as promising technology for species identification. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the performance of MS and the traditional method for identification of beta-hemolytic streptococci (BHS).
methodsClinical BHS isolates were identified by the BD Phoenix SMIC/ID Streptococcal panels, and two MALDI-TOF MS platforms: the VITEK MS and the Bruker MALDI Biotyper systems respectively. In case of discordant results, 16sRNA sequencing was performed to provide the reference ID.
resultsA total of 96 isolates of BHS were analyzed. Thirty-six isolates (20.8%) were re-tested by BD Phoenix for identification failure; and four isolates (4.2%) were rerun on the Bruker system for low identification score. No isolate need a second run for identification by Vitek MS system. Overall, BD Phoenix, BioTyper and Vitek MS automated system accurately identified 76 strains (79.2%), 91 (94.7%) strains and 92 (95.8%) strains, respectively.
conclusionsOur study suggests that MALDI-TOF MS is a superior method to conventional phenotypic methods for BHS identification.
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.