ArticlePloS one2025
Comparison between Legiolert and real time PCR in the detection of Legionella pneumophila from environmental water samples.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Legionellosis is a resvpiratory disease of public health concern. Identification and quantification from environmental sources are crucial for identifying outbreak origins and providing information for risk assessment and disease prevention. Legionella pneumophila is typically detected and quantified using the culture method, which is considered the gold standard, but it has some critical limitations. The Legioler/Quanti-Tray test can be used as an alternative method to simplify the testing process and reduce the time required to obtain the result. In this study, we compare the new liquid culture method Legiolert™ and real-time PCR with traditional plate culture, assessing the performance of PCR and culture methods for detecting L. pneumophila in potable water samples. We analyzed 75 environmental water samples in parallel using the Standard method (ISO 11731:1998), Legiolert, and real-time PCR for the detection of L. pneumophila. The McNemar test was used to assess the difference in accuracy between the Legiolert and real-time PCR methods, showing that the culture test was more accurate than the molecular biology method. The study confirmed that the Legiolert test is specific, easy to use, and may serve as an alternative to standardized procedures for the quantification of L. pneumophila in water. However, due to its high sensitivity and rapid result acquisition, we believe it could be used as a screening tool to quickly ascertain the absence of the microorganism.
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.