Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27413193›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016

Automatic Digital Analysis of Chromogenic Media for Vancomycin-Resistant-Enterococcus Screens Using Copan WASPLab.

Matthew L Faron, Blake W Buchan, Christopher Coon, Theo Liebregts, Anita van Bree, Arjan R Jansz, Genevieve Soucy, John Korver, Nathan A Ledeboer

Abstract 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 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Automated detection of methicillin-resistantJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Image analysis and artificial intelligence in infectious disease diagnostics.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2020
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Matthew L FaronMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Blake W BuchanMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA Wisconsin Diagnostic Laboratories, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4111-048X
Christopher CoonMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Theo LiebregtsPAMM Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Veldhoven, Netherlands.
Anita van BreePAMM Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Veldhoven, Netherlands.
Arjan R JanszPAMM Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Veldhoven, Netherlands.
Genevieve SoucyCHU de Quebec-Universite Laval, Quebec City, Canada.
John KorverHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program, Hamilton Health Sciences, Ontario, Canada.
Nathan A LedeboerMedical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA Wisconsin Diagnostic Laboratories, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA nledeboe@mcw.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are an important cause of health care-acquired infections (HAIs). Studies have shown that active surveillance of high-risk patients for VRE colonization can aid in reducing HAIs; however, these screens generate a significant cost to the laboratory and health care system. Digital imaging capable of differentiating negative and "nonnegative" chromogenic agar can reduce the labor cost of these screens and potentially improve patient care. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the WASPLab Chromogenic Detection Module (CDM) (Copan, Brescia, Italy) software to analyze VRE chromogenic agar and compared the results to technologist plate reading. Specimens collected at 3 laboratories were cultured using the WASPLab CDM and plated to each site's standard-of-care chromogenic media, which included Colorex VRE (BioMed Diagnostics, White City, OR) or Oxoid VRE (Oxoid, Basingstoke, United Kingdom). Digital images were scored using the CDM software after 24 or 40 h of growth, and all manual reading was performed using digital images on a high-definition (HD) monitor. In total, 104,730 specimens were enrolled and automation agreed with manual analysis for 90.1% of all specimens tested, with sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 89.5%, respectively. Automation results were discordant for 10,348 specimens, and all discordant images were reviewed by a laboratory supervisor or director. After a second review, 499 specimens were identified as representing missed positive cultures falsely called negative by the technologist, 1,616 were identified as containing borderline color results (negative result but with no package insert color visible), and 8,234 specimens were identified as containing colorimetric pigmentation due to residual matrix from the specimen or yeast (Candida). Overall, the CDM was accurate at identifying negative VRE plates, which comprised 84% (87,973) of the specimens in this study.

Indexed as

Automation, LaboratoryBacteriological TechniquesChromogenic CompoundsCulture MediaDiagnostic ErrorsGram-Positive Bacterial InfectionsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMass ScreeningOptical ImagingSensitivity and SpecificityVancomycin-Resistant EnterococciChromogenic CompoundsCulture Media

Identifiers

PMID27413193
PMCPMC5035414

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.