Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11376079›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2001

Misidentification and diagnostic delay Caused by a false-positive amplified Mycobacterium tuberculosis direct test in an immunocompetent patient with a Mycobacterium celatum infection.

J H Tjhie, A F van Belle, M Dessens-Kroon, D van Soolingen

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Surgically treatedIDCases · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. A Case of False-PositiveCase reports in infectious diseases · 2016
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Multifocal ERG in ethambutol associated visual loss.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2005
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Mycobacterium celatum pulmonary infection.The Ulster medical journal · 2003
    Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

J H TjhieDepartment of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Maastricht, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX Maastricht, The Netherlands. jtj@lmib.azm.nl
A F van Belle
M Dessens-Kroon
D van Soolingen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Gen-Probe amplified Mycobacterium tuberculosis direct test can give discrepant results directly in respiratory or cultured samples from patients infected with Mycobacterium celatum, leading to inappropriate therapy for, in our case, an immunocompetent patient.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ErrorsDNA ProbesFalse Positive ReactionsHumansImmunocompetenceMaleMiddle AgedMycobacteriumMycobacterium InfectionsMycobacterium tuberculosisReagent Kits, DiagnosticTuberculosis, PulmonaryDNA ProbesReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID11376079
PMCPMC88133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.