Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36752781›Full record

ArticleMicrobial genomics2023

Nanopore-only assemblies for genomic surveillance of the global priority drug-resistant pathogen,

Ebenezer Foster-Nyarko, Hugh Cottingham, Ryan R Wick, Louise M Judd, Margaret M C Lam, Kelly L Wyres, Thomas D Stanton, Kara K Tsang, Sophia David, David M Aanensen and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial genomics, 2023. 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 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Fast and accurateMicrobial genomics · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Ebenezer Foster-NyarkoDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Hugh CottinghamDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Ryan R WickDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Louise M JuddDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Margaret M C LamDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Kelly L WyresDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Thomas D StantonDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Kara K TsangDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Sophia DavidCentre for Genomic Pathogen Surveillance, Big Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
David M AanensenCentre for Genomic Pathogen Surveillance, Big Data Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre for Health Information and Discovery, Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.
Sylvain BrisseInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Biodiversity and Epidemiology of Bacterial Pathogens, Paris, France.
Kathryn E HoltDepartment of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) sequencing has rich potential for genomic epidemiology and public health investigations of bacterial pathogens, particularly in low-resource settings and at the point of care, due to its portability and affordability. However, low base-call accuracy has limited the reliability of ONT data for critical tasks such as antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and virulence gene detection and typing, serotype prediction, and cluster identification. Thus, Illumina sequencing remains the standard for genomic surveillance despite higher capital and running costs. We tested the accuracy of ONT-only assemblies for common applied bacterial genomics tasks (genotyping and cluster detection, implemented via Kleborate, Kaptive and Pathogenwatch), using data from 54 unique

Indexed as

Klebsiella pneumoniaeNanoporesDrug Resistance, BacterialGenomicsMultilocus Sequence TypingReproducibility of ResultsWhole Genome SequencingAMRbacterial pathogensbasecallingbenchmarkinggenomic surveillanceKlebsiella pneumoniaeMLSTNanopore sequencingphylogenetic clusteringserotyping

Identifiers

PMID36752781
PMCPMC9997738

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.