ArticleNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University2017
[Efficacy of real-time PCR for detecting Clostridium difficile infection: comparison with enzyme-linked fluorescent spectroscopy-based approaches].
Article in Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of real?time polymerase chain reaction (q?PCR) for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in comparison with routine culture and enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy?based aprroaches.
methodsStool samples were collected from suspected CDI cases in General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command of PLA between May and December in 2016. All the samples were examined with 3 methods, namely enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy for detecting Clostridium difficile toxin A/B (CDAB), detection of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), and q?PCR for amplification of Clostridium difficile?specific gene tpi and toxin gene (tcdA/tcdB), with the results of fecal culture as the reference for evaluating the diagnostic efficacy of the 3 methods.
resultsOf the total of 70 fecal samples, 13 (18.57%) were found to be positive for Clostridium difficile, including toxin?producing strains in 6 (8.57%) samples. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic coincidence rate of q?PCR for tpi were 92.31%, 91.23%, 70.59%, 98.11% and 91.43%, respectively, which were significantly higher than those of GDH test (84.62%, 84.21%, 55.00%, 96.00%, and 84.29%, respectively; Χ
conclusionBoth CDAB detection and q?PCR have a high specificity in detecting CDI, but GDH detection has a good sensitivity, and all these 3 methods have a high negative predictive value. Compared with other detection methods, amplification of tpi and tcdA/tcdB using q?PCR allows more rapid, sensitive and specific detection of CDI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29292260PMC6744010W2997994435What 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.