ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2020
Diagnosing Clostridioides difficile infections with molecular diagnostics: multicenter evaluation of revogene C. difficile assay.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis ofJournal of medical microbiology · 2024Review
- Comparative evaluation of the STANDARD M10 and XpertJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Clostridioides difficile infections are a significant threat to our healthcare system, and rapid and accurate diagnostics are crucial to implement the necessary infection prevention and control measurements. Nucleic acid amplification tests are such reliable diagnostic tools for the detection of toxigenic Clostridioides difficile strains directly from stool specimens. In this multicenter evaluation, we determined the performance of the revogene C. difficile assay. The analysis was conducted on prospective stool specimens collected from six different sites in Europe. The performance of the revogene C. difficile assay was compared to the different routine diagnostic methods and, for a subset of the specimens, against toxigenic culture. In total, 2621 valid stool specimens were tested, and the revogene C. difficile assay displayed a sensitivity/specificity of 97.1% [93.3-99.0] and 98.9% [98.5-99.3] for identification of Clostridioides difficile infection. Discrepancy analysis using additional methods improved this performance to 98.8% [95.8-99.9] and 99.6% [99.2-99.8], respectively. In comparison to toxigenic culture, the revogene C. difficile assay displayed a sensitivity/specificity of 93.0% [86.1-97.1] and 99.5% [98.7-99.9], respectively. These results indicate that the revogene C. difficile assay is a robust and reliable aid in the diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infections.
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.