Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21463836›Full record

ArticleThe Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences2011

Is it appropriate to routinely use a nucleic acid amplification test for the diagnosis of tuberculosis?

Chih-Bin Lin, Hsu-Wen Chou, Wei-Chiao Lin, Teng-Yi Lin, Tao-Ping Lin, Kwen-Tay Luh, Jen-Jyh Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The application of aptamer in tuberculosis diagnosis: a systematic review.Tropical diseases, travel medicine and vaccines · 2024
    Review
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Chih-Bin LinDepartment of Internal Medicine, Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital, Hualien and Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan.
Hsu-Wen Chou
Wei-Chiao Lin
Teng-Yi Lin
Tao-Ping Lin
Kwen-Tay Luh
Jen-Jyh Lee

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the usefulness of the nucleic acid amplification (NAA) test against conventional tests under normal laboratory operational conditions. The NAA test was performed on the first sputum specimen of all patients. Liquid media culture, solid media culture, and Ziehl-Neelsen stain for an acid-fast bacilli (AFB) smear were performed on three sputum specimens. The results were calculated using the gold standard of either the culture results or the clinical diagnosis. Of the 593 patients tested, 151 (25.5%) were diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis. The sensitivity of the first specimen only was 64% for the NAA test, 54% for the AFB smear, 77% for BACTEC MGIT 960 culture, 40% for Lowestain-Jensen (LJ) culture, and 25% for 7H11 culture. The sensitivity when using all three specimens increased to 63% for AFB smear, 87% for BACTEC MGIT 960 culture, 51% for LJ culture, and 40% for 7H11 culture. The specificity was 100% for all culture tests, 99% for the AFB smear, and 99.5% for NAA test. The mean turnaround time was 1.34 days for NAA, 0.59 days for AFB smear, 11 days for BACTEC MGIT 960 culture, 23 days for LJ culture, and 20 days for 7H11 culture. We conclude that the sensitivity of NAA is still far from ideal, and the test is not cost effective. Thus, the COBAS AMPLICOR PCR system is not suitable for routine use in microbiology laboratories.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMycobacterium tuberculosisNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesSensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID21463836
PMCPMC11916472

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.