ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2022
Application of MRT-qPCR for pathogen detection of lower respiratory tract infection.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid for the Detection of Pathogens in Pulmonary Infections.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Respiratory syncytial virus: A review of current basic and clinical knowledge.Qatar medical journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze and clarify the application value of multiplex quantitative real-time PCR (MRT-PCR) assay in detecting pathogens involved in lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), so as to realize accurate and rapid detection of respiratory pathogens.
methodsBronchial alveolar lavage fluid (BALF) specimens from 186 patients with LRTI collected in the Cangzhou Central Hospital from June 2020 to September 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Pathogen detection was performed by both MRT-PCR and direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA), and the results of different inspection methods were compared.
resultsAmong the seven pathogens detected by MRT-PCR, 140 positive specimens were identified out of the 186 patients, with the top three pathogens with the highest positive rates being influenza A virus (Flu A; 36 [19.35%]), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV; 30 [16.13%]) and human adenovirus (HAdV; 23 [12.37%]), and the pathogen with the lowest positive rate being parainfluenza virus type 3 (PIV3; 9 [4.84%]). DFA showed 110 pathogen-positive specimens, and the top three pathogens with the highest positive rates were Flu A (30 [16.13%]), HAdV (21 [11.29%]) and RSV (19 [10.22%]). The total sensitivity and accuracy of MRT-PCR assay were 93.01% and 98.69% respectively, which were statistically higher than those of 48.45% and 91.24% of DFA (P<0.05). The two inspection methods showed no significant difference in specificity (99.4% for MRT-PCR assay and 97.28% for DFA) (P>0.05).
conclusionsMRT-PCR is rapid, accurate and specific in detecting pathogens of LRTI, which significantly improves the detection rate, with reliable performance and it has high clinical application value.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35702072PMC9185067W4285744755What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.