ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2011
Improved polyacrylamide-based artificial sputum with formalin-fixed tubercle bacilli for training of tuberculosis microscopists.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatial multiomic profiling reveals the novel polarization of foamy macrophages within necrotic granulomatous lesions developed in lungs of C3HeB/FeJ mice infected withFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Article
- Development and validation of external quality assessment panels for mycobacterial culture testing to diagnose tuberculosis in China.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2019Article
- Significant roadblocks exist in developing sputum sample libraries for clinical validation of novel in vitro diagnostics.Drug design, development and therapy · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sputum smear microscopy is an easy, inexpensive, and rapid method for detecting tubercle bacilli when there are more than 10,000 bacilli/ml in the original sputum. Furthermore, because the microscopic method provides not only quantitative, but also qualitative information, such as the shape of bacilli, it has remained significant. We have previously developed and reported panel test slides made from polyacrylamide-based artificial sputum (PBAS) mixed with both cultured THP-1 cells and nonpathogenic mycobacteria. In this paper, we report an improved preparation method for PBAS for panel test slides that provides a simplified method and enhanced availability with high consistency in each grade and in which only negative PBAS is prepared from polyacrylamide and cultured THP-1 cells and mixed with graded formalin-fixed Mycobacterium tuberculosis solution (FFTBS) containing oral flora and Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the slides. In the smears prepared using this improved method, the numbers (average ± standard deviation [SD]) of acid-fast bacilli (AFB) in 300 fields (2- by 3-cm smear) in eight smears of each grade ranged from 5 to 9 (6.4 ± 1.4), from 59 to 88 (74.6 ± 10.0), from 503 to 912 (705.0 ± 145.7), and from 1,819 to 3,256 (2133.3 ± 478.0) in ±, +, ++, and +++ smears, respectively. In addition, this preparation method provided high similarity to the microscopic appearance of bacilli and background seen in the actual patient sputum, with high feasibility. These results revealed that our new PBAS had high authenticity in the appearance and consistency in each grade, which could make it valuable as a reliable artificial sputum for the training of microscopists.
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.