ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2018
Diagnostic Performance of Multiplex Nucleic Acid Testing of Bronchoalveolar Lavage and Bronchial Wash Specimens for Respiratory Viral Pathogens.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utility of the BioFireDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Additional Value of Lower Respiratory Tract Sampling in the Diagnosis of COVID-19: A Real-Life Observational Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical yield of multiple testing with respiratory pathogen panels.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is limited knowledge on the yield of performing multiplex nucleic acid testing (NAT) on multiple lower respiratory tract specimens from a single patient with a single instance of infection. We evaluated the performance characteristics of multiplex NAT assays performed concurrently on bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and bronchial wash (BW) specimens to detect respiratory pathogens. A retrospective study of admitted patients from March 2013 through December 2016 was performed. Individual performance characteristics of BAL and BW specimens were compared to positive results from either set of specimens. Only contemporaneous BAL and BW specimens (received by the laboratory within 4 h of each other) were included. The final cohort included 170 patients, with 184 contemporaneous BAL and BW specimens submitted for multiplex NAT (median age, 58 years; 62% male). Of the patients with positive NAT results, 38 of 40 BW specimens tested positive (overall percent agreement with combined testing, 98.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 95.5 to 98.9%), and 34 of 40 BAL specimens tested positive (overall percent agreement with combined testing, 96.7%; 95% CI, 93.0 to 96.7%). Assays performed on BW specimens identified 4 additional specimens and had a higher positive percent agreement (95.0%) with combined testing results compared to those performed on BAL specimens (85.0%). There was exact concordance in 174 specimens (94.6%; negative and positive for respiratory pathogens, 144 and 34 specimens, respectively). We observed high concordance (95%) between multiplex NAT results from contemporaneous BAL and BW specimens. Performance characteristics of BW specimen testing were equivalent to those of BAL specimen testing. The benefit of performing additional testing should be carefully considered against the potential complications and health care costs.
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.