ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2018
Modified Carba NP Test: Simple and rapid method to differentiate KPC- and MBL-producing Klebsiella species.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Characterization ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial and Diagnostic Stewardship of the Novel β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitors for Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Species andAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- High Frequency ofInfection & chemotherapy · 2023Article
- Progress Report: Antimicrobial Drug Discovery in the Resistance Era.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Comparison of the Performance of Phenotypic Methods for the Detection of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) in Clinical Practice.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Modified Carba NP Test: Simple and rapid method to differentiate KPC- and MBL-producing Klebsiella species.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the modified Carba NP test to differentiate KPC (Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase)- and MBL (metallo-β-lactamase)-producing Klebsiella species.
methodsA total of 508 non-duplicate clinical isolates of Klebsiella spp. were processed by modified Carba NP and combined disc tests which were further confirmed by conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR), a gold standard method for statistical analysis.
resultsModified Carba NP test demonstrated 91.7% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value (PPV) and 99.8% negative predictive value (NPV) for KPC and 96.7%, 100%, 100%, and 99.5% for MBL detection, respectively.
conclusionThe performance of modified Carba NP test was significantly better than combined disc test, fulfilling the requirement of simple and rapid test for clinical applications.
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.