ArticleInfection and drug resistance2025
Comparative Evaluation of mNGS and Traditional Culture Methods in Pathogen Detection for Pulmonary Infections.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between a carbapenem post-prescription audit and gram-negative susceptibility: a 6-year time-series analysis.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- Occupational exposure to freshwater crustaceans as a route of paragonimiasis presenting with eosinophilic pleural effusion misdiagnosed as tuberculous pleurisy: A case report and literature review.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- AI-driven big data analysis and predictive modeling of infectious disease immunity: from correlates to causal, multiscale understanding.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- Epidemiology, pathogen spectrum, and antimicrobial resistance of infections in burn patients stratified by total body surface area: a bicenter study with evaluation of targeted next-generation sequencing.Frontiers in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and clinical applicability of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in pulmonary infections by comparing it with traditional culture methods in a Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) hospital setting. Methods: This retrospective cohort study enrolled 67 consecutively admitted patients with radiologically and clinically confirmed pulmonary infections from the Department of Respiratory Infectious Diseases at Xinchang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine between December 2022 and September 2024. Clinical specimens included blood, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), sputum, hydrothorax and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). mNGS and conventional culture were performed to compare detection rates and microbial community profiles. Results: Among 67 cases, mNGS identified pathogens in 89.55% (60/67), compared to 20.90% (14/67) by traditional culture. Of 14 dual-positive cases, only 1 (1/14, 7.14%) showed complete concordance, while most exhibited discordance or partial genus-level overlap. mNGS further detected viral co-infections in 44.78% (30/67) and identified fastidious/non-culturable pathogens such as enterovirus, human herpesvirus type 1, and Conclusion: mNGS significantly enhances pathogen detection in pulmonary infections, supports targeted antimicrobial therapy, and holds potential for contributing to clinical outcomes and reducing antibiotic resistance.
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.