ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2023
Interlaboratory comparison of
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A consensus-based guideline for personalized bacteriophage therapy.Nature medicine · 2026Guideline
- Phage therapy: from basic biology to clinical application.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Review
- Optical Density-Based Methods in Phage Biology: Titering, Lysis Timing, Host Range, and Phage-Resistance Evolution.Viruses · 2025Review
- Surface Wipe Sampling of Hazardous Medicinal Products: A European Interlaboratory Comparison Study.Drug testing and analysis · 2025Article
- In vitro activity of phages against periprosthetic joint infection-associated staphylococcal biofilms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Genome sequences of two phages active against cystic fibrosis isolates ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025Article
- Current Clinical Laboratory Challenges to Widespread Adoption of Phage Therapy in the United States.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Systematic bacteriophage selection for the lysis of multipleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Translational research priorities for bacteriophage therapeutics.Essays in biochemistry · 2024Review
- A comparison of phage susceptibility testing with two liquid high-throughput methods.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Standardized approaches to phage susceptibility testing (PST) are essential to inform selection of phages for study in patients with bacterial infections. There is no reference standard for assessing bacterial susceptibility to phage. We compared agreement between PST performed at three centers: two centers using a liquid assay standardized between the sites with the third, a plaque assay. Four
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.