ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016
Comparison of Three Biochemical Tests for Rapid Detection of Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic characteristics of the Rapid ESBL NPEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Article
- MAST® D72C test: a novel option for ESBL, AmpC and carbapenemase detection.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Five-Hour Detection of Intestinal Colonization with Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-ProducingMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Direct detection of extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producers in Enterobacterales from blood cultures: a comparative analysis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2022Article
- Antibiotic-functionalized gold nanoparticles for the detection of active β-lactamases.Nanoscale advances · 2022Article
- Detection of Multidrug-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Extended-spectrum β-lactamases: an update on their characteristics, epidemiology and detection.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2021Review
- A Lateral Flow Immunoassay for the Rapid Identification of CTX-M-Producing Enterobacterales from Culture Plates and Positive Blood Cultures.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Analysis of the Degradation of Broad-Spectrum Cephalosporins by OXA-48-ProducingMicroorganisms · 2019Article
- Article
- The next generation of rapid point-of-care testing identification tools for ventilator-associated pneumonia.Annals of translational medicine · 2017Review
- Focus on optimization of early antimicrobial therapy in ICU-acquired infections.Intensive care medicine · 2016Review
- Evaluation of Nordmann, Dortet, and Poirel test for the identification of extended spectrum betalactamase production among urinary isolates ofJournal of laboratory physiciansArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enterobacterial isolates producing clavulanic-inhibited extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) are increasingly spreading in the community and are often responsible for nosocomial infections. Rapid biochemical tests have been developed recently for their detection. Three tests, namely, the Rapid ESBL NDP test, the β-Lacta test, and the Rapid ESBL Screen, have been evaluated with a collection of 108 well-characterized strains, including wild-type strains, strains producing ESBLs, overexpressed cephalosporinases, and carbapenemases. The ESBL NDP test and the Rapid ESBL Screen (a copy of the ESBL NDP test) are aimed at detecting ESBL producers, while the β-Lacta test is aimed at detecting not only ESBL producers but also cephalosporinase and carbapenemase producers. The sensitivity and specificity for detecting ESBL producers (n = 60) were 95% and 100% for the Rapid ESBL NDP test, 80% and 87% (after 30 min) and 92% and 83% (after 2 h) for the Rapid ESBL Screen, and 88% and 71% for the β-Lacta test, respectively. Varied and time-consuming detection (up to 2 h) of ESBLs by the Rapid ESBL Screen and concomitant and varied detection of producers of AmpC and several types of carbapenemases correspond to significant shortcomings of using the Rapid Screen ESBL and β-Lacta tests, respectively.
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.