ArticleBMC infectious diseases2018
Comparison of rRNA-based and DNA-based nucleic acid amplifications for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Ureaplasma urealyticum in urogenital swabs.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genital mycoplasma infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Reproductive health · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison between DNA- and RNA-based nucleic acid amplification tests for detecting Mycoplasma pneumoniae in pediatric specimens.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Towards precision management ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Peritonitis After Endometrial Cytology in a Woman With Hydrosalpinx Caused by ChronicJournal of medical cases · 2025Article
- Prevalence ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Comparison of analytical sensitivity of DNA-based and RNA-based nucleic acid amplification tests for reproductive tract infection pathogens: implications for clinical applications.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Bridging the gap between development of point-of-care nucleic acid testing and patient care for sexually transmitted infections.Lab on a chip · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) are well-accepted in diagnosis and surveillance of sexually infectious pathogens worldwide. However, performance differences between a RNA-based NAAT and DNA-based NAAT are rarely reported. This study compares the performances of the RNA-based SAT (simultaneous amplification and testing) assay and the DNA-based quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assay.
methodsA total of 123 urogenital swabs were collected from outpatients with suspected genital infections in our hospital. Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG), and Ureaplasma urealyticum (UU) in these swabs were simultaneously tested by SAT and qPCR. Any swabs were positive in the qPCR assay were further verified by following cloning and sequencing. All statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS software.
resultsWhen the concentrations of CT, NG, or UU were more than 1 × 10
conclusionsThe SAT assay has better agreements and higher sensitivities when compared with the qPCR assay, and thus could be a better choice for screening, diagnosis, and surveillance of sexually transmitted diseases, especially for CT and NG.
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.