Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9431941›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1998

Comparative analysis of infrequent-restriction-site PCR and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for epidemiological typing of Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 strains.

S Riffard, F Lo Presti, F Vandenesch, F Forey, M Reyrolle, J Etienne

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

S RiffardCentre National de Référence des Legionella, Laboratoire de Bactériologie, UPRES EA1655, Faculté de Médecine R.T.H. Laënnec, Lyon, France. derba@cimac-res.univ-lyon1.fr
F Lo Presti
F Vandenesch
F Forey
M Reyrolle
J Etienne

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two methods were compared for the analysis of 48 unrelated and epidemiologically related Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 isolates. These are the infrequent-restriction-site PCR (IRS-PCR) assay with adapters designed for XbaI and PstI restriction sites and the pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis determined after DNA restriction with SfiI. Both methods demonstrated a high level of discrimination with a similar capacity for differentiating 23 of the 24 unrelated isolates. PFGE analysis and IRS-PCR assay were both able to identify epidemiologically related isolates of L. pneumophila from three outbreaks. Hence, IRS-PCR assay appears to be a reproducible (intergel reproducibility, 100%) and discriminative (discriminatory index, > or = 0.996) tool for typing of Legionella. Compared to PFGE, however, IRS-PCR presented an advantage through ease of performance and with attributes of rapidity and sensitivity of target DNA.

Indexed as

Bacterial Typing TechniquesPolymerase Chain ReactionAnimalsElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldHumansLegionella pneumophilaRabbitsRestriction Mapping

Identifiers

PMID9431941
PMCPMC124828
OpenAlexW2123520656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.