ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparison of the Direct Identification and Short-Term Incubation Methods for Positive Blood Cultures via MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Comparative analytical performance of Autof MS2600 and Biotyper Sirius for rapid MALDI-TOF MS identification of microorganisms from positive blood cultures.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Rapid identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of pathogenic microorganisms from positive blood cultures.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Timely pathogen identification in bloodstream infections is crucial for patient care. A comparison is made between positive blood culture (BC) pellets from serum separator tubes using a direct identification (DI) method and colonies on agar plates from a short-term incubation (STI) method with a matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization Biotyper for the evaluation of 354 monomicrobial BCs. Both the DI and STI methods exhibited similar identification rates for different types of bacteria, except for Gram-positive and anaerobic bacteria. The DI method's results aligned closely with the STI method's results for Enterobacterales, glucose-non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli (GNB), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales. The DI method exhibited high concordance with the conventional method for GNB identification, achieving 88.2 and 87.5% accuracy at the genus and species levels, respectively. Compared with the STI method, the DI method showed a less successful performance for Gram-positive bacterial identification (50.5 vs. 71.3%;
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.