Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 351

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Next-generation sequencing diagnostics of bacteremia in septic patients

Open access
Grumaz, Silke, Stevens, Philip, Grumaz, Christian, Decker, Sebastian O., Weigand, Markus A., Hofer, Stefan, Brenner, Thorsten, von Haeseler, Arndt, Sohn, Kai·2016·Genome Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections remain one of the major challenges in intensive care units, leading to sepsis or even septic shock in many cases. Due to the lack of timely diagnostic approaches with sufficient sensitivity, mortality rates of sepsis are still unacceptably high. However a prompt diagnosis of the causative microorganism is critical to significantly improve outcome of bloodstream infections. Although various targeted molecular tests for blood samples are available, time-consuming blood culture-based approaches still represent the standard of care for the identification of bacteria. METHODS: Here we describe the establishment of a complete diagnostic workflow for the identification of infectious microorganisms from seven septic patients based on unbiased sequence analyses of free circulating DNA from plasma by next-generation sequencing. RESULTS: We found significant levels of DNA fragments derived from pathogenic bacteria in samples from septic patients. Quantitative evaluation of normalized read counts and introduction of a sepsis indicating quantifier (SIQ) score allowed for an unambiguous identification of Gram-positive as well as Gram-negative bacteria that exactly matched with blood cultures from corresponding patient samples. In addition, we also identified species from samples where blood cultures were negative. Reads of non-human origin also comprised fragments derived from antimicrobial resistance genes, showing that, in principle, prediction of specific types of resistance might be possible. CONCLUSIONS: The complete workflow from sample preparation to species identification report could be accomplished in roughly 30 h, thus making this approach a promising diagnostic platform for critically ill patients suffering from bloodstream infections.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13073-016-0326-8

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 50 references

Cited by

See all 351

Metadata

Authors
Grumaz, S., Stevens, P., Grumaz, C., Decker, S. O., Weigand, M. A., Hofer, S., Brenner, T., von Haeseler, A., & Sohn, K.
Venue
Genome Medicine
Published
2016-07-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
73-73
ISSN
1756-994X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2463042271
Cited by
351
References
50
FWCI
20.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Next-generation sequencing diagnostics of bacteremia in septic patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13073-016-0326-8
The paper
Grumaz, S., Stevens, P., Grumaz, C., Decker, S. O., Weigand, M. A., Hofer, S., Brenner, T., von Haeseler, A., & Sohn, K. (2016). Next-generation sequencing diagnostics of bacteremia in septic patients. Genome Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-016-0326-8

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.