Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37238183›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Different BD BACTEC

Rok Tomazin, Tadej Pliberšek, Anja Oštrbenk Valenčak, Tadeja Matos

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rok TomazinInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Zaloška Cesta 4, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-6379-9516
Tadej PliberšekAvacone AG, Gewerbestrasse 4, 4450 Sissach, Switzerland.
Anja Oštrbenk ValenčakInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Zaloška Cesta 4, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Tadeja MatosInstitute of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Zaloška Cesta 4, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
University of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

Slovenian Research Agency P6-0119 and P3-0083
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood culture systems are a potential alternative to classical cultivation of fungi on mycological media, but there are limited data on the suitability of these systems for culturing other sample types (e.g., sterile body fluids). We conducted a prospective study to evaluate different types of blood culture (BC) bottles for the detection of different fungal species in non-blood samples. A total of 43 fungal isolates were tested for their ability to grow in BD BACTEC Mycosis-IC/F (Mycosis bottles), BD BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F (Aerobic bottles) and BD BACTEC Plus Anaerobic/F (Anaerobic bottles) (Becton Dickinson, East Rutherford, NJ, USA) BC bottles inoculated with spiked samples without the addition of blood or fastidious organism supplement. Time to detection (TTD) was determined for all BC types tested and compared between groups. In general, Mycosis and Aerobic bottles were similar (

Indexed as

AspergillusBD BACTEC Mycosis-IC/FBD BACTEC Plus Aerobic/Fblood culturesCandidaCryptococcusfungal infections

Identifiers

PMID37238183
PMCPMC10217702
OpenAlexW4378516746

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.