Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29343540›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2018

Point-Counterpoint: Meningitis/Encephalitis Syndromic Testing in the Clinical Laboratory.

Jennifer Dien Bard, Kevin Alby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2018. 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. Notes regarding the next era for theJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Herpesvirus-Associated Encephalitis: an Update.Current tropical medicine reports · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Impact of cerebrospinal fluid syndromic testing in the management of children with suspected central nervous system infection.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020
    Article
  16. Panels and Syndromic Testing in Clinical Microbiology.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2020
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Jennifer Dien BardDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA jdienbard@chla.usc.edu kevin.alby@uphs.upenn.edu.
Kevin AlbyPathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA jdienbard@chla.usc.edu kevin.alby@uphs.upenn.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4637-8474

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTIONSyndromic panels were first FDA cleared for detection of respiratory pathogens in 2008. Since then, other panels have been approved by the FDA, and most recently, the FilmArray meningitis/encephalitis panel (BioFire, Salt Lake City, UT) has become available. This assay detects 14 targets within 1 h and includes pathogens that typically cause different manifestations of infection, although they infect the same organ system. Several studies have reported both false-positive and false-negative results with this test, and all agree that the cost is significant. As with other panels, health care systems have adopted different strategies for offering this assay. Some have implemented strategies to limit the use of the test to certain patient populations, others have elected not to offer the test, and others have elected not to offer the test and instead request that providers order specific PCRs for the pathogens that best fit the patient's symptoms. In this Point-Counterpoint, Jennifer Dien Bard of the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, and of the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California explains why laboratories should offer these assays without restriction. Kevin Alby of the University of Pennsylvania explains the concerns about the use of these assays as first-line tests and why some limitations on their use might be appropriate.

Indexed as

ChildChild, PreschoolDiagnostic EquipmentEncephalitisHumansMeningitisMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionNeisseria meningitidisSimplexvirusStreptococcus pneumoniaeSyndromeUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationBioFireencephalitisenterovirusfilm arrayherpes simplex viruslab utilizationNeisseria meningitidisStreptococcus pneumoniae

Identifiers

PMID29343540
PMCPMC5869827

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.