ArticleScientific reports2021
Multicenter evaluation of Verigene Enteric Pathogens Nucleic Acid Test for detection of gastrointestinal pathogens.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Multiplex NAAT/PCR and Culture AgainstPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of multiplex nucleic acid amplification tests forPathogens and global health · 2023Pooled it
- Phage amplification-coupled CRISPR/Cas12a system for selective detection of viableFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Hologic Panther Fusion investigational use only assays for gastrointestinal bacterial pathogens.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic performance of microscopic stool examination inJournal of general and family medicine · 2023Article
- Next-generation molecular diagnostics: Leveraging digital technologies to enhance multiplexing in real-time PCR.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the efficiency of the Verigene Enteric Pathogens Nucleic Acid Test (Verigene EP test), which is an automated microarray-based assay system that enables rapid and simultaneous genetic detection of gastrointestinal pathogens and toxins, including those in the Campylobacter Group, Salmonella species, Shigella species, the Vibrio Group, Yersinia enterocolitica, Shiga toxin 1 and 2, norovirus GI/GII, and rotavirus A. Three clinical laboratories evaluated the Verigene EP test, using 268 stool samples for bacterial and toxin genes and 167 samples for viral genes. Culture-based reference methods were used for the detection of bacteria and toxins, while a different molecular assay was used for viral detection. The overall concordance rate between the Verigene EP test and the reference methods for the 1940 assays was 99.0%. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Verigene EP test were 97.0% and 99.3%, respectively. Of the 19 samples with discordant results, 13 samples were false positives and six were false negatives. The Verigene EP test simultaneously detected two targets in 11 samples; overall, the test demonstrated high efficiency in detecting crucial diarrheagenic pathogens, indicating its suitability for clinical practice.
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.