The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis as a replacement for bacteriophage typing of Staphylococcus aureus
Open accessAbstract
Bacteriophage typing (BT) (World Health Organization method) has been used at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for over 30 years to type isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. Since studies have shown that BT patterns have poor reproducibility and because BT fails to type a high percentage (15 to 20%) of isolates, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has converted from using BT to using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) for strain typing S. aureus. We compared the results of BT with results of PFGE for typing 300 isolates of S. aureus, including strains from several well-characterized outbreaks. Ninety-six isolates were BT group I, 19 were group II, 82 were group III, 7 were group V, and 96 were nontypeable. PFGE identified subgroups within each phage group and thus was more discriminating than BT, which identified no subgroups. PFGE was able to type all isolates and distinguish related from unrelated strains of S. aureus. Our modified, standardized PFGE methodology should enable typing laboratories to obtain rapid, reliable results in 3 to 4 days when starting with an isolated colony on agar media.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Molecular Characterization, Evolution, and Epidemiology
Lakhundi, S., & Zhang, K. (2018) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00020-18 · Cited by 1,637
Infection with Vancomycin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Containing the vanA Resistance Gene
Chang, S., Sievert, D. M., Hageman, J. C., Boulton, M. L., Tenover, F. C., Downes, F. P., Shah, S., Rudrik, J. T., Pupp, G. R., Brown, W. J., et al. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa025025 · Cited by 1,095
Self-citationKing, M. D., Humphrey, B. J., Wang, Y. F., Kourbatova, E. V., Ray, S. M., & Blumberg, H. M. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-5-200603070-00005 · Cited by 776
The Isolation of Antibiotic-Resistant Salmonella from Retail Ground Meats
White, D. G., Zhao, S., Sudler, R., Ayers, S., Friedman, S., Chen, S., McDermott, P. F., McDermott, S., Wagner, D. D., & Meng, J. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa010315 · Cited by 549
Ellis, M. W., Hospenthal, D. R., Dooley, D. P., Gray, P. J., & Murray, C. K. (2004) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/423965 · Cited by 448
Metadata
- Authors
- Bannerman, T. L., Hancock, G. A., Tenover, F. C., & Miller, J. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1995-03
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 551-555
- ISSN
- 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-660X
- OpenAlex
- W2154440790
- Cited by
- 550
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis as a replacement for bacteriophage typing of Staphylococcus aureus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jcm.33.3.551-555.1995
- The paper
- Bannerman, T. L., Hancock, G. A., Tenover, F. C., & Miller, J. M. (1995). Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis as a replacement for bacteriophage typing of Staphylococcus aureus. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.33.3.551-555.1995
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.