Assessing new strategies for TB diagnosis in low- and middle-income countries.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Clinical Impact of the Line Probe Assay and Xpert® MTB/RIF Assay in the Presumptive Diagnosis of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis in Brazil: A Pragmatic Clinical Trial.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2022
   Trial
2. Liquid vs Solid Culture Medium to Evaluate Proportion and Time to Change in Management of Suspects of Tuberculosis-A Pragmatic Randomized Trial in Secondary and Tertiary Health Care Units in Brazil.PloS one · 2015
   Trial

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as