↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of serological methods with PCR-based methods for the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia caused by atypical bacteria

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of serological methods with PCR-based methods for the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia caused by atypical bacteria
Published in
Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12952-016-0047-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariana Herrera, Yudy Alexandra Aguilar, Zulma Vanessa Rueda, Carlos Muskus, Lázaro Agustín Vélez

Abstract

The diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) caused by Legionella pneumophila, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Chlamydophila pneumoniae is traditionally based on cultures and serology, which have special requirements, are time-consuming, and offer delayed results that limit their clinical usefulness of these techniques. We sought to develop a multiplex PCR (mPCR) method to diagnosis these bacterial infections in CAP patients and to compare the diagnostic yields obtained from mPCR of nasopharyngeal aspirates (NPAs), nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs), and induced sputum (IS) with those obtained with specifc PCR commercial kits, paired serology, and urinary antigen. A total of 225 persons were included. Of these, 10 patients showed serological evidence of L. pneumophila infection, 30 of M. pneumoniae, and 18 of C. pneumoniae; 20 individuals showed no CAP. The sensitivities were mPCR-NPS = 23.1 %, mPCR-IS = 57.1 %, Seeplex®-IS = 52.4 %, and Speed-oligo®-NPA/NPS = 11.1 %, and the specificities were mPCR-NPS = 97.1 %, mPCR-IS = 77.8 %, Seeplex®-IS = 92.6 %, and Speed-oligo®-NPA/NPS = 96.1 %. The concordance between tests was poor (kappa <0.4), except for the concordance between mPCR and the commercial kit in IS (0.67). In individuals with no evidence of CAP, positive reactions were observed in paired serology and in all PCRs. All PCRs had good specificity but low sensitivity in nasopharyngeal samples. The sensitivity of mPCR and Seeplex® in IS was approximately 60 %; thus, better diagnostic techniques for these three bacteria are required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 2 3%
Unknown 61 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 14 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 29%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,444,553
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#82
of 112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,892
of 298,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,624 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.