ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2017
A Novel Selective Medium for Isolation of Bacteroides fragilis from Clinical Specimens.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Further delineation of the etiology of liver abscesses in cattle and indication of hindgut as a potential source of pathogens.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Biological Mechanisms of EnterotoxigenicToxins · 2025Review
- Time for Some Group Therapy: Update on Identification, Antimicrobial Resistance, Taxonomy, and Clinical Significance of the Bacteroides fragilis Group.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Review
- Developing selective media for quantification of multispecies biofilms following antibiotic treatment.PloS one · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A novel Bacteroides fragilis selective (BFS) medium, consisting of a brain heart infusion agar base supplemented with yeast extract, cysteine hydrochloride, bile salts, vitamin K, hemin, glucose, esculin, ferric ammonium citrate, bromothymol blue, gentamicin, kanamycin, and novobiocin, was evaluated. When BFS agar was tested with a collection of 303 bacteria of different genera, it allowed the growth of B. fragilis as large yellow colonies, with blackening of the medium after 48 h of anaerobic incubation, while the growth of most other anaerobes, facultative anaerobes, and aerobes was inhibited. In a prospective comparison of BFS agar with a routinely used medium (neomycin blood agar) in 1,209 clinical specimens, 60 B. fragilis bacteria were detected on BFS agar while 46 were detected on the routine agar (McNemar's test, P = 0.008). In conclusion, this novel medium may be added to improve the recovery of B. fragilis in clinical specimens and to facilitate surveillance of antimicrobial-resistant strains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.