ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2024
Rapid Direct Identification of Microbial Pathogens and Antimicrobial Resistance Genes in Positive Blood Cultures Using a Fully Automated Multiplex PCR Assay.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnosing Sepsis and Identifying Bacterial Resistance Genes Directly from Whole Blood Using a Rapid Real-Time PCR System.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Rapid Detection of Pathogens and Resistance Genes in Positive Blood Cultures Using BioFirePolish journal of microbiology · 2026Article
- Rapid commercial CTX-M diagnostics: Performance, limitations and clinical impact.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Review
- Current landscape and challenges in anaerobic bloodstream infections: epidemiology, microbiology, and clinical management.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- BacT-Seq, a Nanopore-Based Whole-Genome Sequencing Workflow Prototype for Rapid and Accurate Pathogen Identification and Resistance Prediction from Positive Blood Cultures: A Feasibility Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Genotype-Phenotype Concordance and Ct-Informed Predictive Rules for Antimicrobial Resistance in Adult Patients with Complicated Urinary Tract Infections: Clinical and Stewardship Implications from the NCT06996301 Trial.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Innovations to Combat Antibiotic Resistance in Critical Care: Tools for Targeted Therapy and Stewardship.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Comparative Assessment of Rapid Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Methods for Bloodstream Infections in a Non-24/7 Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Opportunity for early de-escalation of antibiotics in Enterobacterales bacteremia with multiplex PCR rapid diagnostic technology.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study assessed the performance of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) panel in identifying microorganisms and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles in positive blood cultures (BCs) and its influence on turnaround time (TAT) compared with conventional culture methods. We obtained 117 positive BCs, of these, 102 (87.2%) were correctly identified using BCID2. The discordance was due to off-panel pathogens detected by culture (n = 13), and additional pathogens identified by BCID2 (n = 2). On-panel pathogen concordance between the conventional culture and BCID2 methods was 98.1% (102/104). The conventional method detected 19 carbapenemase-producing organisms, 14 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales, 18 methicillin-resistant
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.