Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33087704›Full record

ArticleNature communications2020

A fast impedance-based antimicrobial susceptibility test.

Daniel C Spencer, Teagan F Paton, Kieran T Mulroney, Timothy J J Inglis, J Mark Sutton, Hywel Morgan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Advances in biosensor technologies for the detection of antimicrobial resistance inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniel C SpencerDepartment of Electronics and Computer Science, and Institute for Life Science, University of Southampton, Hampshire, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Teagan F PatonDepartment of Microbiology, PathWest Laboratory Medicine, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.
Kieran T MulroneyFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.
Timothy J J InglisDepartment of Microbiology, PathWest Laboratory Medicine, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8559-8245
J Mark SuttonPublic Health England, National Infection Service, Porton Down, Salisbury, Wiltshire, SP4 0JG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2288-0446
Hywel MorganDepartment of Electronics and Computer Science, and Institute for Life Science, University of Southampton, Hampshire, SO17 1BJ, UK. hm@ecs.soton.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4850-5676

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an urgent need to develop simple and fast antimicrobial susceptibility tests (ASTs) that allow informed prescribing of antibiotics. Here, we describe a label-free AST that can deliver results within an hour, using an actively dividing culture as starting material. The bacteria are incubated in the presence of an antibiotic for 30 min, and then approximately 10

Indexed as

BacteriaBiophysical PhenomenaDrug Resistance, BacterialElectric ImpedanceEquipment DesignHumansKlebsiella pneumoniaeLab-On-A-Chip DevicesMeropenemMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMicrofluidic Analytical TechniquesMeropenem

Identifiers

PMID33087704
PMCPMC7578651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.