ArticleAMB Express2024
Evaluation of three rapid assays for detecting Mycoplasma pneumoniae in nasopharyngeal specimens.
Article in AMB Express, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a LAMP assay using hybridization-based TaqMan-style probes (HyTaq) for simultaneous detection of wild-type and macrolide-resistantJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Research Progress on Point-of-Care Testing Technology for Mycoplasma Pneumonia.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Implementation of a Laboratory-Developed Test for the Diagnosis ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of non-invasive diagnostic tests forFrontiers in immunology · 2025Article
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
During the 2023 autumn-winter period in China, Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP) infections have increased. To address this, rapid and accurate MP DNA detection methods are crucial. Three nucleic acid detection assays (Ustar, Coyote Flash10, Coyote Flash 20) that are widely used in China are currently being evaluated for their effectiveness in detecting MP DNA in nasopharyngeal specimens. Reference standard materials for MP and a total of 35 NPS collected from Peking Union Medical College Hospital were tested using the Ustar, Coyote Flash10 and Coyote Flash 20 assays to assess analytical sensitivity, analytical specificity, diagnostic performance and workflow. The assays showed differing limits of detection (LOD) based on the absolute quantification of reference standards, with LODs of 500 copies/mL for the Ustar assays and 200 copies/mL for both Coyote Flash10 and Coyote Flash 20 assays. Additionally, all three assays displayed excellently analytical specificity in detecting MP DNA.The clinical correlation analysis demonstrated that the Ustar assay exhibited a sensitivity of 90.00%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 100%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 62.50%. In contrast, both the Coyote Flash10 and Coyote Flash 20 assays displayed perfect diagnostic accuracy with 100% sensitivities, specificities, PPVs, and NPVs. Despite variations in detection principles, sample volume, and pre-preparation among the three assays, they all had a turnaround time of less than 30 min with low-throughput processing. Overall, all three rapid nucleic acid detection assays displayed excellent clinical performance in detecting MP DNA, offering a solid foundation for the quick clinical diagnosis of MP infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.