ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2020
Evaluation of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid combined with the loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay in lower respiratory tract infections.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Comparative study of diagnostic efficacy of sputum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid specimens in community-acquired pneumonia children treated with fiberoptic bronchoscopy.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Rapid, accurate, and novel diagnostic technique for respiratory pathogens: Clinical application of loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay in older patients with pneumonia, a multicenter prospective observational study.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Systems Biology and Bile Acid Signalling in Microbiome-Host Interactions in the Cystic Fibrosis Lung.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical application of the loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay has been problematic because of conflicting results obtained from the LAMP assay and bacterial culture. In order to eliminate the interference of oral microorganisms and more accurately evaluate the diagnostic performance of the LAMP assay, we utilized bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) as a sample to test whether the LAMP assay and bacteria culture yielded similar results. A total of 1092 BALF samples from patients with suspected lower respiratory tract infections were collected. For each sample, parallel studies using both bacterial culture and the LAMP assay were carried out. We were the first to utilize BALF as a sample to study the consistency between the LAMP assay and bacterial culture results. The present study demonstrated that the positive rate from the LAMP assay was higher than that from bacterial culture, and the two methods had a better consistency than previously reported.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32774754PMC7407691W3049609233What 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.