ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2022
Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Positive Xpert Carba-R Tests for Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales According to Culture Positivity.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance comparison and clinical validation of two rapid direct identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing approaches for pathogens isolated from positive blood cultures in children.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Rapid Identification of Carbapenemase Genes Directly from Blood Culture Samples.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with positive Xpert Carba-R assay results for carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) according to CPE culture positivity.
methodsWe retrospectively collected data for patients with positive CPE (positive Xpert Carba-R or culture) who underwent both tests from August 2018 to March 2021 in a 2700-bed tertiary referral hospital in Seoul, South Korea. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients positive for Xpert Carba-R according to whether they were positive (XPCP) or negative (XPCN) for CPE culture.
resultsOf 322 patients with CPE who underwent both Xpert Carba-R and culture, 313 (97%) were positive for Xpert Carba-R for CPE. Of these, 87 (28%) were XPCN, and 226 (72%) were XPCP. XPCN patients were less likely to have a history of previous antibiotic use (75.9% vs 90.3%;
conclusionsOur study suggests that XPCN patients had lower rates of both infection and transmission than XPCP patients. The Xpert Carba-R assay is clinically useful not only for rapid identification of CPE but also for predicting risks of infection and transmission when performed along with culture.
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.