ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026
Comparison of three routine methods for the identification of
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Since its first description in 2003, clinical case reports have repeatedly documented that the bacterial species Methods: The aim of this study is to determine the most appropriate method for identifying Results: The results show that MALDI-TOF MS is best suited for identifying Discussion: MALDI-TOF MS is well suited for expanding the reference collection directly from routine diagnostics. The results of 16S gene sequencing should be interpreted with caution. Conversely, biochemical methods must be regarded as unreliable. The species' large core genome suggests a specialized previously unknown specialized ecological niche. Furthermore, two distinct clusters within the reference collection suggest a common origin. Additionally, follow-up studies must determine whether one isolate that cannot be unambiguously assigned to a species represents a previously undescribed member of the genus Kerstersia.
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.