ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Pathogen detection in central nervous system infections: moving metagenomic sequencing closer to clinical practice.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCentral nervous system infections (CNSI) contribute significantly to global disability and mortality, but the causative agent is often undetected. Metagenomic sequencing offers the potential to enhance diagnostic sensitivity, particularly in cases of unusual or partially treated infections. However, caution is required in interpretation of metagenomics data due to technical artefacts from contamination or non-specific read mapping which can reveal a broad spectrum of biologically plausible but diagnostically unlikely organisms.
methodsThis study compares the performance of metagenomic sequencing with standard clinical microbiology methods using cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from patients with CNSI and non-infected control samples. To evaluate sensitivity of different laboratory approaches, we sequenced DNA and RNA metagenomic libraries extracted from CSF, using both cell-free and cellular fractions. We then devised a set of simple, easily interpreted yet rigorous filters tailored for clinical metagenomics to generate a framework for result interpretation that can be readily applied by clinical scientists.
resultsWe demonstrate that composite filtering strategies are essential to reduce misleading signals and support standardised workflows. Additionally, our results suggest that a cell-free sample preparation approach can improve confidence in identifying clinically relevant pathogens, highlighting the impact of sample preparation on results quality.
conclusionIn this study we describe a reproducible method that can be incorporated into a practical framework for clinical application of metagenomic sequencing in CNSI diagnostics.
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.