SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2021
Evaluation of GeneXpert vanA/vanB in the early diagnosis of vancomycin-resistant enterococci infection.
Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of an Assay Involving Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification with a Lateral Flow Dipstick for Detection of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Evaluation of sample pooling using Xpert Carba-R and XpertMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Detection of vanA genes in vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium isolates: implications for additional testing.Access microbiology · 2025Article
- Phenotypic markers misclassify isolates of Salmonella Typhimurium as S. Typhi, but were correctly identified by whole genome sequencing during a septicemia study in western Kenya.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- High Gastrointestinal Colonization Rate of Vancomycin-ResistantInternational journal of microbiology · 2024Article
- The Revolution of Lateral Flow Assay in the Field of AMR Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVancomycin-resistant enterococci infection is a worrying worldwide clinical problem. To evaluate the accuracy of GeneXpert vanA/vanB in the diagnosis of VRE, we conducted a systematic review in the study.
methodsExperimental data were extracted from publications until May 03 2021 related to the diagnostic accuracy of GeneXpert vanA/vanB for VRE in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The accuracy of GeneXpert vanA/vanB for VRE was evaluated using summary receiver to operate characteristic curve, pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio.
results8 publications were divided into 3 groups according to two golden standard references, vanA and vanB group, vanA group, vanB group, including 6 researches, 5 researches and 5 researches, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of group vanA and vanB were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93-0.98) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.88-0.91) respectively. The DOR was 440.77 (95% CI, 37.92-5123.55). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of group vanA were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.81-0.90) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99-0.99) respectively, and those of group vanB were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.63-0.97) and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.80-0.83) respectively.
conclusionGeneXpert vanA/vanB can diagnose VRE with high-accuracy and shows greater accuracy in diagnosing vanA.
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.