Editorial commentary: dead or alive: can viability staining predict response to tuberculosis treatment?

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Assessing Infectiousness and the Impact of Effective Treatment to Guide Isolation Recommendations for People With Pulmonary Tuberculosis.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2025
   Review
2. Statistical Investigation of High Culture Contamination Rates in Mycobacteriology Laboratory.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
   Article
3. New insights into the kinetics of bacterial growth and decay in pig manure-wheat straw aerobic composting based on an optimized PMA-qPCR method.Microbial biotechnology · 2019
   Article
4. Sputum Microscopy With Fluorescein Diacetate Predicts Tuberculosis Infectiousness.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2017
   Article
5. Rapid culture-based diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in developed and developing countries.Frontiers in microbiology · 2015
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Clinical evaluation of tuberculosis viability microscopy for assessing treatment response.2015

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as