ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative diagnostic performance of metagenomic and two targeted sequencing methods in lower respiratory infection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The global trends and clinical progress in influenza co-infection: a visualization and bibliometric analysis (2005-2025).Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Decoding pulmonary infections through targeted next-generation sequencing: comprehensive pathogen profiling in 999 clinical cases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Targeted next-generation sequencing confirms rabies in a patient with unknown exposure: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Insights Into Pathogen Spectrum and Mixed Microbial Detection in Critically Ill Patients With Pulmonary Infection Using Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing.Canadian respiratory journal · 2026Article
- BCS2.0: a capture sequencing platform for rapid differential diagnosis of bacterial infections and antimicrobial resistance.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Post-endoscopic neurosurgicalFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Unveiling the Future of Infective Endocarditis Diagnosis: The Transformative Role of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing in Culture-Negative Cases.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lower respiratory tract infections are characterized by high morbidity and mortality, the latter associated with the low sensitivity and long turnaround time (TAT) of traditional diagnostic methods. Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) offers a promising solution, but in the face of so many different NGS products, how to use them appropriately remains a great challenge for clinicians. This study included 205 patients with suspected lower respiratory tract infections from the department of respiratory and critical care medicine, and collected their lower respiratory tract samples for metagenomic NGS (mNGS) and two different targeted NGS (tNGS), amplification-based tNGS and capture-based tNGS. We analyzed their microorganisms reported, and evaluated their detection performance based on the comprehensive clinical diagnosis. Compared to the two tNGS, mNGS showed significant higher cost ($840) and longer TAT (20 h). Conversely, it identified the highest number of species, totaling 80, compared to 71 species identified by capture-based tNGS and 65 species by amplification-based tNGS. When benchmarked against the comprehensive clinical diagnosis, the capture-based tNGS demonstrated significantly higher diagnostic performance than the other two NGS, with an accuracy of 93.17% and a sensitivity of 99.43%. However, it showed lower specificity compared to the amplification-based tNGS in identifying DNA virus (74.78% vs. 98.25%). The amplification-based tNGS exhibited a poor sensitivity for both gram-positive (40.23%) and gram-negative bacteria (71.74%). Moreover, tNGS was able to identify genotypes, antimicrobial resistance genes and virulence factors. In conclusion, mNGS is suited for the detection of rare pathogens; the capture-based tNGS is preferable for routine diagnostic testing; the amplification-based tNGS can be an alternative in situations requiring rapid results and constrained by limited resources.
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.