ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Evaluation of molecular mouse sepsis panel: new portable and rapid tests for microorganism detection in suspected blood stream infection.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary Single-Center Evaluation of the Alifax Molecular Mouse Sepsis Panel for Rapid Detection of Bloodstream Pathogens.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Performance of Novel Gram-Negative and Gram-Positive Sepsis Panels for the Rapid Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Biomarkers for Invasive Candidiasis: A Clinician-Oriented Review.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) represent a significant public health concern, characterized by the presence of pathogens in the bloodstream, leading to serious conditions. Between 30 and 40% of BSIs evolve in sepsis, characterized by a life-threatening organ dysfunction and accompanied by a strong or dysregulated systemic immune or inflammatory response. A timely and accurate diagnosis of BSIs is crucial for ensuring effective management and treatment of critically ill patients. The diagnosis of BSIs can be initiated either from positive blood culture (BC) or directly from blood specimens using advanced diagnostic methods, these approaches are increasingly integrated into traditional diagnostic workflows. Methods: In the context of emerging molecular methods, Alifax introduced the Molecular Mouse (MM) Sepsis Panel in 2022. This study aims to evaluate the performance of MM cartridges in detecting Gram-positive bacteria and Gram-negative bacteria, as well as their associated resistance genes, using clinical leftover positive BCs and contrived samples for low-prevalence targets. Positive BCs were collected at the Unit of Microbiology, The Great Romagna Hub Laboratory, Pievesestina, FC, Italy. Results: Overall, MM Sepsis Panel showed excellent sensitivity (98.62%) and specificity (99.81%), confirming the system's reliability and accuracy. Discussion: The high diagnostic accuracy demonstrated by these tests supports their potential application as rapid diagnostic tools for blood cultures, facilitating prompt identification of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance determinants in clinical microbiology settings.
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.