ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2023
Analysis of molecular characteristics of CAMP-negative
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Iron Supplementation with Ferrous Sulfate or Ferrous Bisglycinate for 12 Weeks Does Not Influence Group B Streptococcus Colonization in Cambodian Women: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.The Journal of nutrition · 2025Trial
- Disruption of Functional Membrane Microdomains Enhances Methicillin-ResistantVeterinary sciences · 2026Article
- CAMP-negative group B Streptococcus in pregnant women: molecular and clinical features with implications for diagnostics and neonatal management.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Rapid detection ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Phenotypic and Genetic Characterization and Production Abilities ofFood science & nutrition · 2025Article
- Screening of Group BOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Methods: Vaginal/rectal swabs, collected from women at 35-37 weeks of pregnancy, were first inoculated into a selective enrichment broth media, then subcultured onto GBS chromogenic agar and 5% sheep blood agar sequentially. The VITEK-2 automatic identification system and MALDI-TOF MS were initially employed for identification, followed by the CAMP test. CAMP-negative strains underwent 16S rDNA and Results: A total of 190 strains were isolated, with 15 identified as CAMP-negative. Further 16S rDNA gene sequence analysis confirmed that all 15 strains were Conclusion: This study found that 7.9% of GBS strains isolated from the vagina/rectum of pregnant women were CAMP-negative, suggesting that the CAMP test method or primers targeting the
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.