ReviewThe Journal of infectious diseases2011
Evaluation of tuberculosis diagnostics: establishing an evidence base around the public health impact.
Review in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Genetic mutations associated with isoniazid resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a systematic review.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Impact of point-of-care CD4 testing on linkage to HIV care: a systematic review.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2014Pooled it
- Trial
- Advances in the Diagnosis of Latent Tuberculosis Infection.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Review
- Review
- Rapid Molecular Assays for the Diagnosis of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.Infection and drug resistance · 2022Review
- Antibody Fc Glycosylation Discriminates Between Latent and Active Tuberculosis.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Review
- Diagnostic point-of-care tests in resource-limited settings.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2014Review
- Challenges in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of new diagnostic tests for HIV-associated tuberculosis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2013Article
- Tuberculosis diagnostics: why we need more qualitative research.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2013Article
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
Abstract
The limitations of existing tuberculosis diagnostic tools are significantly hampering tuberculosis control efforts, most noticeably in areas with high prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and antituberculosis drug resistance. However, renewed global interest in tuberculosis research has begun to bear fruit, with several new diagnostic technologies progressing through the development pipeline. There are significant challenges in building a sound evidence base to inform public health policies because most diagnostic research focuses on the accuracy of individual tests, with often significant limitations in the design, conduct, and reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. Diagnostic accuracy studies may not be appropriate to guide public health policies, and clinical trials may increasingly be required to determine the incremental value and cost-effectiveness of new tools. The urgent need for new diagnostics should not distract from pursuing rigorous scientific evaluation focused on public health impact.
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.