ArticleMicroorganisms2022
Comparative Evaluation of Three Immunoassays for the Simultaneous Detection of
Article in Microorganisms, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- From microbiome profiling to precision medicine: diagnostic and therapeutic potential in gastrointestinal disorders: current evidence, challenges, and future directions.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Review
- Effects of Omeprazole on Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection Caused by ST81 Strains and Their Potential Mechanisms.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the medical laboratory, a step-by-step workflow for
methodsA total of 304 stool samples were tested for the presence of GDH antigen and CD toxin A/B using VIDAS
resultsAll three GDH assays showed overall substantial agreement with the CD culture. All three toxin A/B assays showed overall moderate agreement with the Xpert
conclusionsSince the QCC GDH and toxin A/B assay is relatively more sensitive and specific than the other two immunoassays for discriminating toxigenic or non-toxigenic CDI, QCC is very helpful for the simultaneous identification of GDH and CD toxin A/B in the initial step of the two-round workflow for diagnosing CDI.
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.