ArticleInfection and drug resistance2024
Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing for Accurate Diagnosis of
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Case Report: A rare case of Pneumocystis jirovecii infection with left hydropneumothorax following immunotherapy for stage IVB clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical analysis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in children with malignant disease.BMC pediatrics · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a high-throughput sequencing technique that identifies a wide array of pathogens directly from clinical specimens. This study evaluates the diagnostic value of mNGS in Methods: Seventy-eight patients hospitalized between January 2022 and March 2023 with suspected pulmonary infections were included. Patients were eligible for mNGS if they exhibited symptoms such as fever, cough, dyspnea, or progressive hypoxemia, and met specific clinical criteria for PJP. Specimens obtained included bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, sputum, and peripheral blood. Positive rates and pathogen distributions detected by mNGS and traditional methods were compared. Results: In the PJP group, 25%, 37.5%, and 9.38% of patients had solid organ tumors, corticosteroid use, and skin diseases, respectively, significantly higher than in the non-PJP group. The sensitivity and specificity of mNGS were both 100%, significantly higher than those of serum BDG (sensitivity 50%, specificity 81.8%) and LDH (sensitivity 9.3%, specificity 91.3%). Significant differences in microbial composition between the PJP and Non-PJP groups were observed. mNGS detected multiple mixed pathogens in 96.88% of PJP cases, with 68.75% exhibiting mixed bacterial and viral infections. Notably, 71% of patients improved following antibacterial treatment based on mNGS results. Conclusion: mNGS technology shows superior sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing PJP and guides precise treatment for complex pulmonary infections.
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.