Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28278219›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Development and performance assessment of a luminex xMAP® direct hybridization assay for the detection and identification of indoor air fungal contamination.

Xavier Libert, Ann Packeu, Fabrice Bureau, Nancy H Roosens, Sigrid C J De Keersmaecker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  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

5 authors.

Xavier LibertPlatform Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, Scientific Institute of Public Health (WIV-ISP), Brussels, Belgium.
Ann PackeuMycology and Aerobiology, Scientific Institute of Public Health (WIV-ISP), Brussels, Belgium.
Fabrice BureauCellular and Molecular Immunology, Groupe Interdisciplinaire de Génoprotéomique Appliquée (GIGA), Université de Liège (ULg), Sart-Tilman, Belgium.
Nancy H RoosensPlatform Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, Scientific Institute of Public Health (WIV-ISP), Brussels, Belgium.
Sigrid C J De KeersmaeckerPlatform Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, Scientific Institute of Public Health (WIV-ISP), Brussels, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4198-4133

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Considered as a public health problem, indoor fungal contamination is generally monitored using classical protocols based on culturing. However, this culture dependency could influence the representativeness of the fungal population detected in an analyzed sample as this includes the dead and uncultivable fraction. Moreover, culture-based protocols are often time-consuming. In this context, molecular tools are a powerful alternative, especially those allowing multiplexing. In this study a Luminex xMAP® assay was developed for the simultaneous detection of 10 fungal species which are most frequently in indoor air and that may cause health problems. This xMAP® assay was found to be sensitive, i.e. its limit of detection is ranging between 0.05 and 0.01 ng of gDNA. The assay was subsequently tested with environmental air samples which were also analyzed with a classical protocol. All the species identified with the classical method were also detected with the xMAP® assay, however in a shorter time frame. These results demonstrate that the Luminex xMAP® fungal assay developed in this study could contribute to the improvement of public health and specifically to the indoor fungal contamination treatment.

Indexed as

Air Pollution, IndoorDNA ProbesEnvironmentFungiLimit of DetectionNucleic Acid HybridizationDNA Probes

Identifiers

PMID28278219
PMCPMC5344485

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.