Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27092134›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2016

Metataxonomic and Metagenomic Approaches vs. Culture-Based Techniques for Clinical Pathology.

Sarah K Hilton, Eduardo Castro-Nallar, Marcos Pérez-Losada, Ian Toma, Timothy A McCaffrey, Eric P Hoffman, Marc O Siegel, Gary L Simon, W Evan Johnson, Keith A Crandall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Effect ofJournal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Sex Difference in the Effect ofJournal of cancer prevention · 2024
    Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Sarah K HiltonComputational Biology Institute, The George Washington University Ashburn, VA, USA.
Eduardo Castro-NallarComputational Biology Institute, The George Washington UniversityAshburn, VA, USA; Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Center for Bioinformatics and Integrative Biology, Universidad Andres BelloSantiago, Chile.
Marcos Pérez-LosadaComputational Biology Institute, The George Washington UniversityAshburn, VA, USA; Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos (CIBIO-InBIO)Vairão, Portugal; Children's National Medical Research CenterWashington DC, USA.
Ian TomaDivision of Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences Washington DC, USA.
Timothy A McCaffreyDivision of Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Tropical Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences Washington DC, USA.
Eric P HoffmanChildren's National Medical Research Center Washington DC, USA.
Marc O SiegelDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, The George Washington University Washington DC, USA.
Gary L SimonDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, The George Washington University Washington DC, USA.
W Evan JohnsonComputational Biomedicine, Boston University School of Medicine Boston, MA, USA.
Keith A CrandallComputational Biology Institute, The George Washington University Ashburn, VA, USA.

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science Institute at Children's NationalUL1TR000075 · NCATS · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GUAY-WOODFORD, LISA MARIE · 2012 to 2015
$13.7M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnoses that are both timely and accurate are critically important for patients with life-threatening or drug resistant infections. Technological improvements in High-Throughput Sequencing (HTS) have led to its use in pathogen detection and its application in clinical diagnoses of infectious diseases. The present study compares two HTS methods, 16S rRNA marker gene sequencing (metataxonomics) and whole metagenomic shotgun sequencing (metagenomics), in their respective abilities to match the same diagnosis as traditional culture methods (culture inference) for patients with ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP). The metagenomic analysis was able to produce the same diagnosis as culture methods at the species-level for five of the six samples, while the metataxonomic analysis was only able to produce results with the same species-level identification as culture for two of the six samples. These results indicate that metagenomic analyses have the accuracy needed for a clinical diagnostic tool, but full integration in diagnostic protocols is contingent on technological improvements to decrease turnaround time and lower costs.

Indexed as

drug resistancehigh throughput sequencingmetagenomicsmetataxonomicsmicrobiomepathogen detection

Identifiers

PMID27092134
PMCPMC4823605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.