ArticleOpen life sciences2023
mNGS facilitates the accurate diagnosis and antibiotic treatment of suspicious critical CNS infection in real practice: A retrospective study.
Article in Open life sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel techniques for the diagnosis of neurological infections.Current opinion in neurology · 2025Review
- Exploring the Spectrum of Microbiota in Central Nervous System Infections Through Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Clinical Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing for Suspected Central Nervous System Infections in a Municipal Hospital: A Retrospective Study in China.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Comparison of microbial culture, metagenomic next-generation sequencing and droplet digital polymerase chain reaction methods for pathogen detection in patients with neurosurgical central nervous system infection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Impact of metagenomic sequencing on clinical outcomes in patients with suspected central nervous system infections: a retrospective case-control study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Clinical Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing for Diagnosis of Central Nervous System Infections: Advances and Challenges.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2024Review
- Nanopore sequencing of infectious fluid is a promising supplement for gold-standard culture in real-world clinical scenario.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- The application value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in community-acquired purulent meningitis after antibiotic intervention.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Case report: A toxoplasmic encephalitis in an immunocompromised child detected through metagenomic next-generation sequencing.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Clinical utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in fever of undetermined origin.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whether metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) could benefit patients with suspected severe central nervous system (CNS) infection in terms of diagnosis and antibiotic treatment remains unknown. We retrospectively analyzed 79 patients with suspected CNS infection and undertook mNGS. The value of mNGS was investigated in terms of identification of pathogen and guidance for the adjustment of antibiotic treatment. The relationship between the time of initiating mNGS since onset and the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score after 90-day follow-up were analyzed. Fifty out of 79 cases with suspicious severe CNS infection were finally diagnosed. Despite previous routine laboratory tests, mNGS further promoted the accurate identification of pathogens in 23 cases (47.9%). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of mNGS test in this study were 84.0, 79.3, and 82.3%, respectively. Furthermore, mNGS facilitated the adjustment of empirical antibiotic treatments in 38 cases (48.1%). The time of taking mNGS since onset had an insignificant weak positive correlation with GOS after 90-day follow-up (
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.