ArticleInfluenza and other respiratory viruses2021
Cepheid Xpert
Article in Influenza and other respiratory viruses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Diagnostic Performance of the 36-Minute STANDARD M10 Fast Assay for Molecular Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A and B, and Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Near-Patient Settings.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Article
- Risk factors associated with severe RSV disease among hospitalized children in the second year of life: a multicenter study.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- The Impact of Rapid Molecular Diagnostics for Influenza on Antibiotic Stewardship in the Emergency Department-An Observational Retrospective Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Summarizing Study Characteristics and Diagnostic Performance of Commercially Available Tests for Respiratory Syncytial Virus: A Scoping Literature Review in the COVID-19 Era.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Simultaneous monitoring of eight human respiratory viruses including SARS-CoV-2 using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Allplex Respiratory Panels 1, 2, 3, and BioFire FilmArray Respiratory Panel for the Detection of Respiratory Infections.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Potentially redundant repeat liver function test ordering practices in australian hospitals: A 5-year multicentre retrospective observational study.International journal of clinical practice · 2021Observational
- Cepheid XpertInfluenza and other respiratory viruses · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMolecular assays based on reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) provide reliable results for the detection of respiratory pathogens, although diagnostic agreement varies. This study determined the agreement between the RT-PCR assays (Xpert
methodsWe retrospectively identified 914 patient encounters where testing with both Xpert
resultsThe positive percent agreement was 95.1% for influenza A, 87.5% for influenza B, and 77.8% for RSV. The negative percent agreement was 99.4% for influenza A, 99.9% for influenza B, and 100% for RSV. The prevalence and bias-adjusted kappa was 0.98 for influenza A, 0.99 for influenza B, and 0.97 for RSV. In a sensitivity analysis, the positive percent agreement values were significantly higher during the non-influenza season than the influenza season for influenza B and RSV.
conclusionsThe Xpert
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.