Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27194688›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016

Evaluation of Molecular Methods for Identification of Salmonella Serovars.

Catherine Yoshida, Simone Gurnik, Aaminah Ahmad, Travis Blimkie, Stephanie A Murphy, Andrew M Kropinski, John H E Nash

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. RAPD Fingerprinting and Genetic Diversity ofArchives of Razi Institute · 2021
    Article
  4. Evaluation ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  5. Comparison of xMAPFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. CharacterizingFrontiers in veterinary science · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Pan-genome Analyses of the SpeciesFrontiers in microbiology · 2017
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catherine YoshidaNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada catherine.yoshida@canada.ca.
Simone GurnikNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Aaminah AhmadNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Travis BlimkieNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Stephanie A MurphyNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew M KropinskiNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
John H E NashNational Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Public Health Agency of Canada · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Classification by serotyping is the essential first step in the characterization of Salmonella isolates and is important for surveillance, source tracking, and outbreak detection. To improve detection and reduce the burden of salmonellosis, several rapid and high-throughput molecular Salmonella serotyping methods have been developed.The aim of this study was to compare three commercial kits, Salm SeroGen (Salm Sero-Genotyping AS-1 kit), Check&Trace (Check-Points), and xMAP (xMAP Salmonella serotyping assay), to the Salmonella genoserotyping array (SGSA) developed by our laboratory. They were assessed using a panel of 321 isolates that represent commonly reported serovars from human and nonhuman sources globally. The four methods correctly identified 73.8% to 94.7% of the isolates tested. The methods correctly identified 85% and 98% of the clinically important Salmonella serovars Enteritidis and Typhimurium, respectively. The methods correctly identified 75% to 100% of the nontyphoidal, broad host range Salmonella serovars, including Heidelberg, Hadar, Infantis, Kentucky, Montevideo, Newport, and Virchow. The sensitivity and specificity of Salmonella serovars Typhimurium and Enteritidis ranged from 85% to 100% and 99% to 100%, respectively.It is anticipated that whole-genome sequencing will replace serotyping in public health laboratories in the future. However, at present, it is approximately three times more expensive than molecular methods. Until consistent standards and methodologies are deployed for whole-genome sequencing, data analysis and interlaboratory comparability remain a challenge. The use of molecular serotyping will provide a valuable high-throughput alternative to traditional serotyping. This comprehensive analysis provides a detailed comparison of commercial kits available for the molecular serotyping of Salmonella.

Indexed as

SerogroupAnimalsGenotyping TechniquesHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesSalmonellaSalmonella InfectionsSalmonella Infections, AnimalSerotyping

Identifiers

PMID27194688
PMCPMC4963511
OpenAlexW2401630927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.