ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2026
Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for the diagnosis and evaluation of pediatric pleural effusion: a case series.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPleural effusion is a common symptom in children with respiratory diseases, with infections being the leading cause. Currently, the use of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for pleural effusion has not been fully evaluated in pediatric lung disease patients.
methodsPatients who had undergone mNGS for pleural effusion were included in the study. Patients were categorized into a clinically useful group and a not clinically useful group on the basis of their clinical data, laboratory results, and mNGS results.
resultsA total of 48 children were included in this study. The number of positive mNGS results was 32/48 (66.7%), which was greater than that of conventional tests (22/48 [45.8%]). The diagnostic concordance of mNGS for detecting bacterial infections was 62.5% (20/32) higher than that of conventional detection methods, which was 15.6% (5/32). However, the diagnostic concordance of mNGS in detecting mycoplasma infections (4/9 vs. 7/9) and tuberculosis infections (0/5 vs. 5/5) was lower than that of conventional detection methods. Compared with the not clinically useful group, the clinically useful group had a lower mean age (50.50 [IQR, 32.25, 102.50] vs. 98.00 [IQR, 60.00, 118.50] months, P = 0.019), a greater incidence of wheezing (n = 5/23 vs. n = 0/23, P = 0.018), a greater incidence of pulmonary consolidation (n = 15/23 vs. n = 8/23, P = 0.039), and a greater incidence of loculated pleural effusion (n = 5/23 vs. n = 0/23, P = 0.018). Additionally, the clinically useful group had a longer hospital stay (17.0 [IQR, 10.75, 25.0] vs. 12.0 [IQR, 6.75, 15.00] days, P = 0.011). Nevertheless, the rate of improvement after treatment was greater in the clinically useful group than in the not clinically useful group (100% vs. 73.9%, P = 0.009).
conclusionmNGS has distinct diagnostic advantages, with more accurate bacterial identification in pediatric pleural effusion. Negative results may prompt exploration of non-infectious causes. However, pathogen-specific limitations should be considered.
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.