ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2020
Multicenter Evaluation of a PCR-Based Digital Microfluidics and Electrochemical Detection System for the Rapid Identification of 15 Fungal Pathogens Directly from Positive Blood Cultures.
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 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 42 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
- The future of fungal diagnostics: What's next in laboratory testing for invasive fungal infection?Medical mycology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Failure in Invasive Fungal Infections: Causes, Clinical Consequences, and Mitigation Strategies.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Test Performance and Clinical Utility of the Cobas Eplex Blood Culture Identification Fungal Pathogen Panel.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- BeyondJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparison of pathogen and resistance profiles in bloodstream infections using conventional methods and multiplex RT-PCR.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Analysis of the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of intensive care unit staff regardingFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- The Molecular Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Diseases with a Focus on PCR.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Performance of the LIAISON PLEX yeast blood culture assay for identifying 16 invasive fungal pathogens in blood cultures.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Approaches forMicroorganisms · 2025Review
- Detection of clinically relevant Candida species from positive blood cultures using a novel sample-to-answer molecular assay.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Current Updates on Molecular Diagnostic Assays Used for Detection ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the EazyplexDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of false-positiveJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Trans-kingdom fungal pathogens infecting both plants and humans, and the problem of azole fungicide resistance.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
- Epidemiology and Outcomes of Non-albicans Candida Bloodstream Infections in Transplant Recipients and Cancer Patients.Mycopathologia · 2023Article
- Diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: challenges and recent developments.Journal of biomedical science · 2023Review
- 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
- Fungi-on-a-Chip: microfluidic platforms for single-cell studies on fungi.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Routine identification of fungal pathogens from positive blood cultures by culture-based methods can be time-consuming, delaying treatment with appropriate antifungal agents. The GenMark Dx ePlex investigational use only blood culture identification fungal pathogen panel (BCID-FP) rapidly detects 15 fungal targets simultaneously in blood culture samples positive for fungi by Gram staining. We aimed to determine the performance of the BCID-FP in a multicenter clinical study. Blood culture samples collected at 10 United States sites and tested with BCID-FP at 4 sites were compared to the standard-of-care microbiological and biochemical techniques, fluorescence in situ hybridization using peptide nucleic acid probes (PNA-FISH) and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS). Discrepant results were analyzed by bi-directional PCR/sequencing of residual blood culture samples. A total of 866 clinical samples, 120 retrospectively and 21 prospectively collected, along with 725 contrived samples were evaluated. Sensitivity and specificity of detection of
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.