ArticleMicroorganisms2020
Multicenter Comparative Study of Six
Article in Microorganisms, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of optimized DNA extraction protocols for the quantification of Eimeria spp. from chicken feces using real-time PCR.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of shotgun metagenomics as a diagnostic tool for infectious gastroenteritis.PloS one · 2025Article
- Nanoparticle Lysis ofMethods and protocols · 2024Article
- Multicenter comparative study of Enterocytozoon bieneusi DNA extraction methods from stool samples, and mechanical pretreatment protocols evaluation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Development and Evaluation/Verification of a Fully Automated Test Platform for the Rapid Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- The First Identification ofVeterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Next-Generation Sequencing Applied toPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparative Evaluation of an Easy Laboratory Method for the Concentration of Oocysts and Commercial DNA Isolation Kits for the Molecular Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- A summary of cryptosporidiosis outbreaks reported in France and overseas departments, 2017-2020.Food and waterborne parasitology · 2022Article
- Cryptosporidiosis outbreak in Amazonia, French Guiana, 2018.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Article
- Genetic diversity of Cryptosporidium spp. in non-human primates in rural and urban areas of Ethiopia.PloS one · 2022Article
- Selecting a multiplex PCR panel for accurate molecular diagnosis of intestinal protists: a comparative study of AllplexParasite (Paris, France) · 2022Article
- Comparison of Three Real-Time PCR Assays Targeting the SSU rRNA Gene, the COWP Gene and the DnaJ-Like Protein Gene for the Diagnosis ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Sparse Evidence forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Comparative Performance of Eight PCR Methods to DetectPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Comparative Study of Eleven Mechanical Pretreatment Protocols forMicroorganisms · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNowadays, many commercial kits allow the detection of
methodsA multicenter comparative study was conducted within the framework of the French National Reference Center-Expert Laboratory for Cryptosporidiosis. Six extraction systems (i.e., manual or automated) associated with various mechanical pretreatment protocols, were compared for the
resultsThe sensitivity of real-time PCR assay was unequally impacted by the pretreatment/extraction protocol. We observed significant differences for the lowest concentrations of
conclusionsSample pretreatment, as well as the extraction method, needs to be properly adapted to improve the diagnostic performances of the
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.