ArticleInfection and drug resistance2020
Clinical Performance of BD Kiestra InoqulA Automated System in a Chinese Tertiary Hospital.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Etiology and clinical features of non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae infection in an inland city in China.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2023Article
- Five-Hour Detection of Intestinal Colonization with Extended-Spectrum-β-Lactamase-ProducingMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Comparison of the APAS Independence Automated Plate Reader System with the Manual Standard of Care for Processing Urine Culture Specimens.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Comparison of an automated DNA extraction and 16S rDNA real time PCR/sequencing diagnostic method using optimized reagents with culture during a 15-month study using specimens from sterile body sites.BMC microbiology · 2022Article
- A Prospective Study of Etiological Agents Among Febrile Patients in Sierra Leone.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of the BD Kiestra InoqulA automated specimen processing system with commonly encountered clinical microbiology specimens. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour types of clinical specimens (sputum, urine, normally sterile body fluids, and feces) were inoculated onto relevant agar plates using a manual method and the BD Kiestra automated system. The number of isolated pathogen species, number of isolated single colonies and uniformity of plate streaking were calculated and compared between two methods.
resultsSignificantly more isolated colonies were observed on plates inoculated by InoqulA for all specimen types and media with the exception of sputum specimens inoculated onto chocolate agar with vancomycin (
conclusionThis is the first evaluation study of InoqulA with 4 types of clinical specimens in China. It focused on the effect of streaking plates automatically with the magnetic bead. Inoculation of clinical specimens with the BD Kiestra InoqulA system is superior to the manual method for recovery of single colonies and the overall quality of semi-quantitative plate streaking.
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.