TABLE 2.
Comparison of outbreak delineations of different subtyping methodsa
Outbreak | Result by: |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
WGST | MLVA | CRISPR-MLVST | PFGE | |
A | ++ | + | + | − |
B | ++ | + | + | ++ |
C | ++ | ++ | + | ++ |
D | ++ | ++ | + | + |
E | ++ | + | + | + |
F | ++ | ++ | ++ | + |
G | ++ | ++ | ++ | ++ |
H | ++ | + | + | + |
I | ++ | ++ | + | + |
J | ++ | − | + | + |
K | ++ | − | − | + |
L | ++ | ++ | ++ | + |
M | ++ | + | + | + |
N | ++ | + | − | + |
O | ++ | + | − | + |
P | ++ | + | − | + |
Symbols are used to report evaluations of subtyping methods. ++, isolates from the outbreak formed a cluster, and the cluster did not include isolates from other outbreaks or sporadic cases; +, isolates from the outbreak clustered with each other but also with isolates from other outbreaks or sporadic cases; −, isolates from the outbreak did not form a cluster.