Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30627428›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2019

Comparison of GeneXpert MRSA/SA ETA assay with semi-quantitative and quantitative cultures and

Jasmine Coppens, Liesbet Van Heirstraeten, Alexey Ruzin, Li Yu, Leen Timbermont, Christine Lammens, Veerle Matheeussen, Michael McCarthy, Philippe Jorens, Margareta Ieven and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jasmine Coppens1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Liesbet Van Heirstraeten1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Alexey Ruzin2MedImmune, Gaithersburg, USA.
Li Yu2MedImmune, Gaithersburg, USA.
Leen Timbermont1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Christine Lammens1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Veerle Matheeussen3Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Michael McCarthy2MedImmune, Gaithersburg, USA.
Philippe Jorens4Department of Critical Care Medicine, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.
Margareta Ieven1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Samir Kumar-Singh1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Herman Goossens1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Surbhi Malhotra-Kumar1Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Vaccine & Infectious Disease Institute, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, D.S.6.23, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8699-8905
University of Antwerp · BEAntwerp University Hospital · BEAltimmune (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Methods: ETA analyzed by routine SQ-culture on blood and colistin-nalidixic-acid agar was compared to: (i) quantitative (Q-) culture on chromogenic COLOREX™ Staph aureus; (ii) enrichment in brain-heart-infusion broth followed by plating on blood agar and COLOREX™; (iii) Results: Of the 79 ETA samples analyzed by SQ-culture, 39 samples were positive, and 40 negative for Conclusion: This first evaluation of the GeneXpert MRSA/SA ETA assay with ETA samples found it to be highly sensitive, specific, user-friendly (hands-on time ~ 5 min.), and rapid (~ 66 min. assay time). Where this equipment is not available, we recommend implementing more sensitive culture-based methods for improved

Indexed as

Bacterial ProteinsDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrococcal NucleasePneumonia, Ventilator-AssociatedReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcus aureusVentilators, MechanicalBacterial ProteinsMicrococcal Nucleasenuc protein, staphylococcusCepheidChromogenic mediumCOLOREX™ staph aureusRapid diagnosticsReal-time PCRVAPVentilator-associated pneumonia

Identifiers

PMID30627428
PMCPMC6321727
OpenAlexW2908037486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.