Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33362754›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2020

Which Current and Novel Diagnostic Avenues for Bacterial Respiratory Diseases?

Héloïse Rytter, Anne Jamet, Mathieu Coureuil, Alain Charbit, Elodie Ramond

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A comprehensive review ofFrontiers in medicine · 2024
    Review
  9. Rapid detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Utility and Applicability of Rapid Diagnostic Testing in Antimicrobial Stewardship in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Delphi Consensus.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022
    Article
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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Héloïse RytterUniversité de Paris, Paris, France.
Anne JametUniversité de Paris, Paris, France.
Mathieu CoureuilUniversité de Paris, Paris, France.
Alain CharbitUniversité de Paris, Paris, France.
Elodie RamondUniversité de Paris, Paris, France.
Institut Necker Enfants Malades · FRAssistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRInserm · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial acute pneumonia is responsible for an extremely large burden of death worldwide and diagnosis is paramount in the management of patients. While multidrug-resistant bacteria is one of the biggest health threats in the coming decades, clinicians urgently need access to novel diagnostic technologies. In this review, we will first present the already existing and largely used techniques that allow identifying pathogen-associated pneumonia. Then, we will discuss the latest and most promising technological advances that are based on connected technologies (artificial intelligence-based and Omics-based) or rapid tests, to improve the management of lung infections caused by pathogenic bacteria. We also aim to highlight the mutual benefits of fundamental and clinical studies for a better understanding of lung infections and their more efficient diagnostic management.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencediagnostic testlung disease (diagnosis)rapid testrespiratory tract infection

Identifiers

PMID33362754
PMCPMC7758241
OpenAlexW3112537501

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.