ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Rapid and sensitive identification of
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- The future of fungal diagnostics: What's next in laboratory testing for invasive fungal infection?Medical mycology · 2026Review
- A Multiplex One-Tube Nested Real-Time PCR Assay for the Point-of-Care Testing of Infectious Meningitis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sensitive and Rapid Dual One-Tube Recombinase Aided PCR Assays for the Simultaneous Detection of Cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr Virus, Human Herpesvirus 6, and Herpes Simplex Virus 1/2 in Whole Blood From Children Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.Journal of medical virology · 2026Article
- A nested PCR-based point-of-care multiplex test for detection of bacterial pathogens in cerebrospinal fluids.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Clinically, timely diagnosis and effective treatment of Methods: We used the M1-mRAP method aimed at detecting Results: The limit of detection(LOD) for CA, CT, and CG by the mRAP method were 4, 4, and 3 copies/μL, respectively. The LOD for CA, CT, and CG simulated blood samples by the M1-mRAP were 2, 2, and 1 CFU/mL, and the overall detection time was about 3.5 h. Clinical assays of mRAP and M1-mRAP showed that these two methods were consistent with qPCR (P<0.05), but had better clinical detection ability than qPCR. Specifically, the mRAP method identified 5 (4.2%) qPCR-negative samples, while M1-mRAP detected 1 (11.1%) classified as the qPCR grey zone sample. Conclusion: The M1-mRAP method provides rapid and sensitive detection of low concentrations of CA, CT, and CG blood samples and has the potential to emerge as an important tool for the early detection of
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.