ArticlePloS one2015
16S rRNA Gene Sequence-Based Identification of Bacteria in Automatically Incubated Blood Culture Materials from Tropical Sub-Saharan Africa.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limited Reliability of the Molecular Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- No hints for abundance of Bacillus anthracis and Burkholderia pseudomallei in 100 environmental samples from Cameroon.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2021Article
- New Developments in PCR-Based Diagnostics for Bacterial Pathogens Causing Gastrointestinal Infections-A Narrative Mini-Review on Challenges in the Tropics.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2021Review
- Identification and Elimination of the Clinically Relevant Multi-Resistant Environmental BacteriaMicroorganisms · 2020Article
- Biodiversity of AflatoxigenicFrontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Article
- Detection of eight foodborne bacterial pathogens by oligonucleotide array hybridization.Electronic physician · 2017Article
- Diagnosis of Bacterial Bloodstream Infections: A 16S Metagenomics Approach.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe quality of microbiological diagnostic procedures depends on pre-analytic conditions. We compared the results of 16S rRNA gene PCR and sequencing from automatically incubated blood culture materials from tropical Ghana with the results of cultural growth after automated incubation.
methodsReal-time 16S rRNA gene PCR and subsequent sequencing were applied to 1500 retained blood culture samples of Ghanaian patients admitted to a hospital with an unknown febrile illness after enrichment by automated culture.
resultsOut of all 1500 samples, 191 were culture-positive and 98 isolates were considered etiologically relevant. Out of the 191 culture-positive samples, 16S rRNA gene PCR and sequencing led to concordant results in 65 cases at species level and an additional 62 cases at genus level. PCR was positive in further 360 out of 1309 culture-negative samples, sequencing results of which suggested etiologically relevant pathogen detections in 62 instances, detections of uncertain relevance in 50 instances, and DNA contamination due to sample preparation in 248 instances. In two instances, PCR failed to detect contaminants from the skin flora that were culturally detectable. Pre-analytical errors caused many Enterobacteriaceae to be missed by culture.
conclusionsPotentially correctable pre-analytical conditions and not the fastidious nature of the bacteria caused most of the discrepancies. Although 16S rRNA gene PCR and sequencing in addition to culture led to an increase in detections of presumably etiologically relevant blood culture pathogens, the application of this procedure to samples from the tropics was hampered by a high contamination rate. Careful interpretation of diagnostic results is required.
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.