Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27147724›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical microbiology2016

Laboratory Diagnosis of Congenital Toxoplasmosis.

Christelle Pomares, Jose G Montoya

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Christelle PomaresPalo Alto Medical Foundation Toxoplasma Serology Laboratory, National Reference Center for the Study and Diagnosis of Toxoplasmosis, Palo Alto, California, USA Stanford University, Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford, California, USA INSERM U1065, Centre Méditerranéen de Médecine Moléculaire, Toxines Microbiennes dans la Relation Hôte-Pathogènes, Nice, France Service de Parasitologie-Mycologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice, Nice, France.
Jose G MontoyaPalo Alto Medical Foundation Toxoplasma Serology Laboratory, National Reference Center for the Study and Diagnosis of Toxoplasmosis, Palo Alto, California, USA Stanford University, Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford, California, USA gilberto@stanford.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated that screening and treatment for toxoplasmosis during gestation result in a decrease of vertical transmission and clinical sequelae. Early treatment was associated with improved outcomes. Thus, laboratory methods should aim for early identification of infants with congenital toxoplasmosis (CT). Diagnostic approaches should include, at least, detection of Toxoplasma IgG, IgM, and IgA and a comprehensive review of maternal history, including the gestational age at which the mother was infected and treatment. Here, we review laboratory methods for the diagnosis of CT, with emphasis on serological tools. A diagnostic algorithm that takes into account maternal history is presented.

Indexed as

Clinical Laboratory TechniquesDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansSerologic TestsToxoplasmosis, Congenital

Identifiers

PMID27147724
PMCPMC5035424

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.