Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27323765›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2016

Comparison of enzyme immunoassays and rapid diagnostic tests for clostridium difficile glutamate dehydrogenase and toxin a + B to toxinogenic culture on a highly selective chromogenic medium.

A Olling, H Leidinger, R Hoffmann

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Laboratory Diagnostic Methods forAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A OllingR-Biopharm, An der neuen Bergstraße 17, 64297, Darmstadt, Germany.
H LeidingerR-Biopharm, An der neuen Bergstraße 17, 64297, Darmstadt, Germany.
R HoffmannInstitut für Labormedizin und Mikrobiologie, Klinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstraße 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany. reinhard.hoffmann@klinikum-augsburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1514-1183
R-Biopharm (Germany) · DEUniversity Hospital Augsburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare Clostridium. (C.) difficile toxin A/B and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) enzyme immunoassays or rapid diagnostic tests to toxinogenic culture on recently described highly selective agar plates. Five hundred consecutive samples sent in for C. difficile diagnostics were tested by toxin A/B enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and rapid diagnostic test (RDT), GDH EIA and RDT, and culture on chromID C. difficile plates for 48 hrs, with toxin testing from culture if the toxin EIA from feces was negative. Samples with discordant results from EIA and RDT were submitted to C. difficile-specific 16S rRNA gene and tcdB PCR. Ninety-two, 88, 31, and 37 samples were positive by GDH EIA, GDH RDT, toxin A/B EIA, and toxin A/B RDT respectively. Seventy-four samples were positive by culture, 54 culture-positive samples were subjected to repeat toxin testing, with an additional 29 samples positive. Thus, there were 60 C. difficile toxin A/B positive samples in total (12 %). Single-step screening with GDH EIA, GDH RDT, toxin A/B EIA, and toxin A/B RDT would have missed seven (12 %), 11 (18 %), 29 (48 %) or 27 (45 %) of all positive samples respectively. Single-step screening with GDH or toxin A/B tests from feces misses a significant proportion of patients compared to toxinogenic culture, putting these patients at risk from undiagnosed C. difficile infection. More data are needed to establish the clinical significance of a positive toxinogenic culture result in the absence of detectable toxin A/B in feces.

Indexed as

Bacterial ToxinsBacteriological TechniquesChromatography, AffinityClostridioides difficileClostridium InfectionsCulture MediaDiagnostic Tests, RoutineDiarrheaGlutamate DehydrogenaseHumansImmunoenzyme TechniquesBacterial ToxinsCulture MediaGlutamate Dehydrogenase

Identifiers

PMID27323765
OpenAlexW2466693177

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.