ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Performance of TDR-300B and VITEK®2 for the identification of
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effective therapeutic strategies against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Burkholderia Cepacia complex infections.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Focused Review on Commercially Available Automated Systems for Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing.Journal of tropical medicine · 2025Review
- Detection and molecular insights into the azurin gene expression post- gamma irradiation in P. aeruginosa.Archives of microbiology · 2024Article
- Molecular Identification, Histopathology and Antibiotic Susceptibility Profiling of Aeromonas veronii Isolated from Oreochromis niloticus in Bangladesh.Veterinary medicine and science · 2024Article
- Enrofloxacin, Effective Treatment ofMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- DecodingFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- Methicillin-resistant Staphylococci in canine pyoderma in Thailand.Veterinary world · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAutomated systems are needed for the rapid and accurate diagnosis of
methodsThis analytical study employed a cross-sectional approach. First, 44 clinical isolates of
resultsCompared with the results for VITEK®-MS, the congruence rates for TDR-300B and VITEK®2 were 80.76% (21/26) and 92.30% (24/26), respectively. Further, high sensitivity was observed for TDR-300B and VITEK®2 (95.45% and 100%, respectively). In addition, TDR-300B had a lower positive predictive value and accuracy than VITEK®2, albeit without significance.
conclusionsConclusively, there were no significant differences regarding the diagnostic efficiency of TDR-300B and VITEK®2 for
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.