Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39105591›Full record

ArticlemSystems2024

Whole-genome sequencing for antimicrobial surveillance: species-specific quality thresholds and data evaluation from the network of the European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance genomic proficiency tests of 2021 and 2022.

Lauge Holm Sørensen, Susanne Karlsmose Pedersen, Jacob Dyring Jensen, Niamh Lacy-Roberts, Athina Andrea, Michael S M Brouwer, Kees T Veldman, Yan Lou, Maria Hoffmann, Rene S Hendriksen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSystems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Enteroflow: Automated Pipeline for In Silico Characterization ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Lauge Holm SørensenNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Research Group for Global Capacity Building, European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-8766-3979
Susanne Karlsmose PedersenNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Research Group for Global Capacity Building, European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Jacob Dyring JensenNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Research Group for Global Capacity Building, European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Niamh Lacy-RobertsNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Research Group for Global Capacity Building, European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Athina AndreaNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Research Group for Global Capacity Building, European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Michael S M BrouwerWageningen Bioveterinary Research part of Wageningen University and Research, Lelystad, the Netherlands.
Kees T VeldmanWageningen Bioveterinary Research part of Wageningen University and Research, Lelystad, the Netherlands.
Yan LouU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food and Safety and Applied Nutrition, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Maria HoffmannU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food and Safety and Applied Nutrition, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Rene S HendriksenNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Research Group for Global Capacity Building, European Union Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.

Funding

EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (H2020) 773830European Union EURLs-EURCs 2021-2022UK AID Flemming Fund Regional Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance shifts to genomics, ensuring the quality of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data produced across laboratories is critical. Participation in genomic proficiency tests (GPTs) not only increases individual laboratories' WGS capacity but also provides a unique opportunity to improve species-specific thresholds for WGS quality control (QC) by repeated resequencing of distinct isolates. Here, we present the results of the EU Reference Laboratory for Antimicrobial Resistance (EURL-AR) network GPTs of 2021 and 2022, which included 25 EU national reference laboratories (NLRs). A total of 392 genomes from 12 AMR-bacteria were evaluated based on WGS QC metrics. Two percent (

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialEuropean UnionGenome, BacterialLaboratory Proficiency TestingWhole Genome SequencingAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaHumansLaboratoriesQuality ControlSpecies SpecificityAnti-Bacterial Agentsantimicrobial resistancegenomic proficiency testnext-generation sequencingquality controlshort-read sequencingstatistical comparisonwhole-genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID39105591
PMCPMC11406893

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.