ArticleNew microbes and new infections2025
Targeted next-generation sequencing enhances precision and rapid detection in healthcare-associated infection Surveillance: Unveiling multidrug-resistant colonization in ICUs.
Article in New microbes and new infections, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early targeted next-generation sequencing accelerates clinical recovery in children with community-acquired pneumonia: A retrospective study.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the potential advantages of targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) over conventional bacterial culture methods for pathogen detection in hospital-associated infections (HAIs). Methods: All EICU medical staff and all medical staff from the Physical Examination Centre completed a questionnaire. Nasopharyngeal specimens were collected from medical staff who met all of the inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria. EICU medical staff provided 2 samples each, while Physical Examination Centre staff provided 1 sample each. For EICU medical staff, one of their two nasopharyngeal swabs was subjected to tNGS testing, and the other to bacterial culture testing. For the PEC staff, their nasopharyngeal swabs were subjected to tNGS testing. Additionally, six pairs of spectacles and six keyboards used by EICU medical staff were randomly selected, and the surfaces were swabbed with sterile swabs for tNGS testing. Results: In 23 nasal swab samples from EICU group, tNGS detected 14 species of microorganism in 29 instances within 19 h. Bacterial culture detected 2 species of microorganism in 4 instances, 2 positive samples within 19 h and confirmed another 2 positive samples within 69 h. A total of 42 samples with 14 different microorganism species were collected from the nasopharyngeal swabs of 23 EICU members and 15 PEC members. Among them, 29 cases (69 %) of 14 different microorganisms were detected in EICU staff, with an average of 1.3 microorganism species detected per person, while 13 cases (28 %) of 6 different microorganisms were detected in PEC staff, with an average of 0.9 microorganism species detected per person. The most common colonizing bacteria included Conclusions: tNGS outperforms conventional culture in healthcare-associated infection surveillance, with higher sensitivity and accelerated pathogen identification. Simultaneously, tNGS revealed extensive colonization of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens (e.g.,
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.