ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1999
Evaluation of the new MB redox system for detection of growth of mycobacteria.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Revisiting the methods for detectingAccess microbiology · 2021Review
- Utility of Real-Time Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction in DetectingBioMed research international · 2017Article
- Biosensing technologies for Mycobacterium tuberculosis detection: status and new developments.Clinical & developmental immunology · 2011Review
- Tuberculosis in the developing world: recent advances in diagnosis with special consideration of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2008Review
- Two liquid medium systems, mycobacteria growth indicator tube and MB redox tube, for Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolation from sputum specimens.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2000Article
- Simple and rapid identification of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex by immunochromatographic assay using anti-MPB64 monoclonal antibodies.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1999Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated a new mycobacterial culture system, MB Redox, for recovery rate and time to detection of mycobacteria from 742 consecutive respiratory specimens and compared the results to those found with Löwenstein-Jensen (LJ) medium. Twenty specimens (2.7%) were positive for M. tuberculosis: 17 on LJ medium and 19 in MB Redox, with 16 specimens positive in both media. In addition, 24 specimens (3.2%) were positive for nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), 20 on LJ medium, 18 in MB Redox, and 14 in both media. For M. tuberculosis, the mean times to detection were 28.9 days on LJ medium and 23.6 days in MB Redox, and for NTM, the mean times to detection were 40.6 days on LJ medium and 32.3 days in MB Redox.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.