ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2020
Clinical Performance of the Novel GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture ID Gram-Positive Panel.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical impact and cost-consequence analysis of ePlex® blood culture identification panels for the rapid diagnosis of bloodstream infections: a single-center randomized controlled trial.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Trial
- Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of Rapid Diagnostic Testing for the Identification of Pathogens and Resistance Genes in Bloodstream Infections.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- The Brief Case: Adjudication of discrepant genotypic and phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing results in a patient withJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
- Epidemiology of healthcare-associated ventriculitis and meningitis (HCAVM) and community-acquired meningitis/encephalitis and evaluation of an off-label PCR panel for HCAVM diagnosis.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Comparison of pathogen and resistance profiles in bloodstream infections using conventional methods and multiplex RT-PCR.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- The role of rapid multiplex molecular syndromic panels in the clinical management of infections in critically ill patients: an experts-opinion document.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Review
- Advancing quantitative PCR with color cycle multiplex amplification.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Getting Up to Speed: Rapid Pathogen and Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics in Sepsis.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Article
- Clinical utility of multiplex PCR in the detection of pathogens from sterile body fluids.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Global impact of antibacterial resistance in patients with hematologic malignancies and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients.Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society · 2023Review
- Diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: challenges and recent developments.Journal of biomedical science · 2023Review
- Difficult-to-Treat Pathogens: A Review on the Management of Multidrug-ResistantLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Test Performance and Potential Clinical Utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Negative Panel.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Fast Track Diagnostic Tools for Clinical Management of Sepsis: Paradigm Shift from Conventional to Advanced Methods.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Shortening identification times: comparative observational study of three early blood culture testing protocols.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Observational
- A PCR-Reverse Dot Blot Hybridization Based Microfluidics Detection System for the Rapid Identification of 13 Fungal Pathogens Directly After Blood Cultures Over a Period of Time.Infection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- A Closer Look at the Laboratory Impact of Utilizing ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels: a Workflow Analysis Using Rapid Molecular Detection for Positive Blood Cultures.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Recent Developments in Phenotypic and Molecular Diagnostic Methods for Antimicrobial Resistance Detection inDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Empyema caused by Streptococcus constellatus: a case report and literature review.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid identification from positive blood cultures is standard of care (SOC) in many clinical microbiology laboratories. The GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Positive (BCID-GP) Panel is a multiplex nucleic acid amplification assay based on competitive DNA hybridization and electrochemical detection using eSensor technology. This multicenter study compared the investigational-use-only (IUO) BCID-GP Panel to other methods of identification of 20 Gram-positive bacteria, four antimicrobial resistance genes, and both Pan
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.