ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2014
Multicenter feasibility study to assess external quality assessment panels for Xpert MTB/RIF assay in South Africa.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Molecular detection of rifampicin-resistantFrontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Evolution of Laboratory Diagnosis of Tuberculosis.Clinics and practice · 2024Review
- Construction and application of a heterogeneous quality control library for the Xpert MTB/RIF assay in tuberculosis diagnosis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- Advancing proficiency testing for ultra in resource-limited settings using dried tube specimen: A study by SRL-Uganda.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- A global proficiency testing programme for Xpert® MTB/RIF using dried tube specimens, 2013-2015.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- Development of dried tube specimens for Xpert MTB/RIF proficiency testing.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- 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
- Impact of External Quality Assurance on the Quality of Xpert MTB/RIF Testing in Viet Nam.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- Practical Guidance for Clinical Microbiology Laboratories: Mycobacteria.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2018Review
- Rolling Out XpertAfrican journal of laboratory medicine · 2017Article
- Diagnosis of opportunistic infections: HIV co-infections - tuberculosis.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2017Review
- Impact of the GeneXpert MTB/RIF Technology on Tuberculosis Control.Microbiology spectrum · 2017Review
- The use of digital PCR to improve the application of quantitative molecular diagnostic methods for tuberculosis.BMC infectious diseases · 2016Article
- Development, roll-out and impact of Xpert MTB/RIF for tuberculosis: what lessons have we learnt and how can we do better?The European respiratory journal · 2016Review
- Quality assurance for HIV point-of-care testing and treatment monitoring assays.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2016Article
- The WHO AFRO external quality assessment programme (EQAP): Linking laboratory networks through EQA programmes.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2016Article
- A pilot evaluation of external quality assessment of GenoType MTBDRplus versions 1 and 2 using dried culture spot material.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert MTB/RIF assay.Expert review of molecular diagnostics · 2015Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
External quality assessment (EQA) for the Xpert MTB/RIF assay is part of the quality system required for clinical and laboratory practice. Five newly developed EQA panels that use different matrices, including a lyophilized sample (Vircell, Granada, Spain), a dried tube specimen (CDC), liquid (Maine Molecular Quality Control, Inc. [MMQCI], Scarborough, ME), artificial sputum (Global Laboratory Initiative [GLI]), and a dried culture spot (National Health Laboratory Services [NHLS]), were evaluated at 11 GeneXpert testing sites in South Africa. The panels comprised Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC)-negative, MTBC-positive (including rifampin [RIF] susceptible and RIF resistant), and nontuberculosis mycobacterial material that was inactivated and safe for transportation. Twelve qualitative and quantitative variables were scored as acceptable (1) or unacceptable (0); the overall panel performance score for the Vircell, CDC, GLI, and NHLS panels was 9 of 12, while the MMQCI panel scored 6 of 12 (owing to the need for cold chain maintenance). All panels showed good compatibility with Xpert MTB/RIF testing, and none showed PCR inhibition. The use of a liquid or dry matrix did not appear to be a distinguishing criterion, as both matrices had reduced scores on insufficient volumes, a need for extra consumables, and the ability to transfer to the Xpert MTB/RIF cartridge. EQA is an important component of the quality system required for diagnostic testing programs, but it must be complemented by routine monitoring of performance indicators and instrument verification. This study aims to introduce EQA concepts for Xpert MTB/RIF testing and evaluates five potential EQA panels.
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.