ReviewFuture microbiology2018
The GenMark ePlex
Review in Future microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid Microbiological Diagnostics for Sepsis: Narrative Review of Current and Prospective Approaches.Critical care explorations · 2026Review
- MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry from nucleic acid: development and evaluation of a novel platform for identification of mycobacteria and detection of genetic markers of resistance.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: challenges and recent developments.Journal of biomedical science · 2023Review
- Test Performance and Potential Clinical Utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Negative Panel.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Shortening identification times: comparative observational study of three early blood culture testing protocols.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Observational
- Forty Years of Molecular Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Review
- Digital Microfluidic qPCR Cartridge for SARS-CoV-2 Detection.Micromachines · 2022Article
- The predictive potential of different molecular markers linked to amikacin susceptibility phenotypes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.PloS one · 2022Article
- Screening, Diagnostic and Prognostic Tests for COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- The potential application of electrochemical biosensors in the COVID-19 pandemic: A perspective on the rapid diagnostics of SARS-CoV-2.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2021Review
- Considerations for diagnostic COVID-19 tests.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2021Review
- Development of an Online Tool forFrontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Ethical surgical triage of patients with head and neck cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.Head & neck · 2020Review
- Comparing the analytical performance of three SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic assays.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2020Article
- Clinical Performance of the Novel GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture ID Gram-Positive Panel.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Appropriate Use and Future Directions of Molecular Diagnostic Testing.Current infectious disease reports · 2020Review
- Plazomicin: a new aminoglycoside in the fight against antimicrobial resistance.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As one of the most recent additions to the syndromic testing landscape, the ePlex
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.