ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2017
Evaluation of Copan FecalSwab as Specimen Type for Use in Xpert C. difficile Assay.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of COPAN FecalSwab and eSwab collection systems for the detection of CMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Copan eNAT Transport System To Address Challenges in COVID-19 Diagnostics in Regions with Limited Testing Access.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- Best practices for performance of real-time PCR assays in veterinary diagnostic laboratories.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the FecalSwab for Stool Specimen Storage and Molecular Detection of Enteropathogens on the BD Max System.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liquid-based microbiology (LBM) devices incorporating flocked swabs and preservation medium ease transport of specimens and improve specimen yield compared to traditional fiber wound swabs; however, the performance of LBM collection devices has not been evaluated in many molecular assays. It is unclear how the differences in matrix and specimen loading with an LBM device will affect test performance compared to traditional collection devices. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of specimens collected in FecalSwab transport medium (Copan Diagnostics, Murrieta, CA) compared to unpreserved stool using the Cepheid Xpert
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.