Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33661410›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2021

The Unyvero Hospital-Acquired pneumonia panel for diagnosis of secondary bacterial pneumonia in COVID-19 patients.

Chaitanya Tellapragada, Christian G Giske

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Rapid commercial CTX-M diagnostics: Performance, limitations and clinical impact.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. The Brief Case: A fatal case ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Evaluation of a pneumonia multiplex PCR panel for detection of bacterial respiratory tract pathogens from serial specimens collected from hospitalized COVID-19 patients.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chaitanya TellapragadaDivison of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Alfred Nobels Allé 8, 14183, Stockholm, Sweden. Chaitanya.tellapragada@ki.se.
Christian G GiskeDivison of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Alfred Nobels Allé 8, 14183, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study was undertaken to evaluate the performance of Unyvero Hospitalized Pneumonia (HPN) panel application, a multiplex PCR-based method for the detection of bacterial pathogens from lower respiratory tract (LRT) samples, obtained from COVID-19 patients with suspected secondary hospital-acquired pneumonia. Residual LRT samples obtained from critically ill COVID-19 patients with predetermined microbiological culture results were tested using the Unyvero HPN Application. Performance evaluation of the HPN Application was carried out using the standard-of-care (SoC) microbiological culture findings as the reference method. Eighty-three LRT samples were used in the evaluation. The HPN Application had a full concordance with SoC findings in 59/83 (71%) samples. The new method detected additional bacterial species in 21 (25%) and failed at detecting a bacterial species present in lower respiratory culture in 3 (3.6%) samples. Overall the sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of the HPN Application were 95.1% (95%CI 96.5-98.3%), 98.3% (95% CI 97.5-98.9%), 71.6% (95% CI 61.0-80.3%), and 99.8% (95% CI 99.3-99.9%), respectively. In conclusion, the HPN Application demonstrated higher diagnostic yield in comparison with the culture and generated results within 5 h.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBacteriaCOVID-19Cross InfectionFemaleHospitalsHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionPneumonia, BacterialSARS-CoV-2SwedenBacterial pneumoniaCOVID-19Hospital-Acquired pneumoniaMultiplex-PCRRapid-diagnostic tests

Identifiers

PMID33661410
PMCPMC7930892
OpenAlexW3134684547

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.