ArticleMedical journal, Armed Forces India2013
Comparison of IS6110 and 'short fragment' devR (Rv3133c) gene targets with phenotypic methods for diagnosis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
Article in Medical journal, Armed Forces India, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis (TB), declared a global emergency in 1993 by the WHO, remains a worldwide public health problem. Rapid diagnosis is required for treatment and prevention. This study compares genotypic methods using two gene targets [IS6110 and 'short fragment' devR (Rv3133c)] with phenotypic methods [Lowenstein Jensen (LJ) and BACTEC 460] for the diagnosis of TB while using Ziehl Neelsen (ZN) staining as the gold standard.
methods56 clinical TB samples from a tertiary care apex center along with 50 healthy control samples, excluding samples from patients already on ATT were processed by routine USP methodology. Smears were graded by ZN stain. Solid media (LJ) and liquid media (BACTEC 460) were used along with IS6110 and 'short fragment' devR (Rv3133c) specific gene amplification and comparatively analyzed.
results50/56 samples were positive by phenotypic methods, 53 by IS6110 and 45 by devR (Rv3133c) amplification. 38 samples were positive by both phenotypic and genotypic methods. IS6110 detected six and devR (Rv3133c) detected five phenotypically negative samples. Both IS6110 and devR (Rv3133c) were positive in 42 samples. 11 devR (Rv3133c) negative samples were positive by IS6110 and three IS6110 negative samples were positive by 'short fragment' devR (Rv3133c). Compared to phenotypic methods, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of IS6110 was 94%, 89.29%, 88.68% and 94.34% while that of devR (Rv3133c) was 80%, 91.07%, 88.89% and 83.61% respectively.
conclusionSimultaneous use of both phenotypic and genotypic methods increases the yield of positive results.
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.