ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
The small membrane filter method of microscopy to diagnose pulmonary tuberculosis.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Trial
- A controlled evaluation of filter paper use during staining of sputum smears for tuberculosis microscopy.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Small Membrane Filtration Method for Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis in a High-HIV-Prevalence Setting.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Evaluation of a modified small membrane filtration method.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- Prospective cross-sectional evaluation of the small membrane filtration method for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
- Increased sensitivity in diagnosis of tuberculosis in HIV-positive patients through the small-membrane-filter method of microscopy.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2013Article
- It is health that is real wealth & not pieces of gold & silver.The Indian journal of medical research · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We modified microscopy for acid-fast bacilli to diagnose tuberculosis (TB) using small membrane filters (SMFs) after special processing and prefiltration. With the first specimen obtained from each of 335 persons suspected of having TB, the sensitivity of the new SMF method using fluorescence microscopy (FM) was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 80%, 95%). This was significantly better (P = 0.0001) than the sensitivity of routine FM of centrifuged specimens of 60% (95% CI: 49%, 71%) or that of direct sputum smears of 56% (95% CI: 40%, 72%).
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.