Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25765104›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of infectious diseases2015

Defining the needs for next generation assays for tuberculosis.

Claudia M Denkinger, Sandra V Kik, Daniela Maria Cirillo, Martina Casenghi, Thomas Shinnick, Karin Weyer, Chris Gilpin, Catharina C Boehme, Marco Schito, Michael Kimerling and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

96 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. XpertThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A Point-of-Care Prediction Tool for Recurrent Tuberculosis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Claudia M DenkingerFIND, Geneva, Switzerland Division of Infectious Disease, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Sandra V KikMcGill International TB Centre and Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Daniela Maria CirilloIRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Martina CasenghiMédecins sans Frontières, Geneva, Switzerland.
Thomas ShinnickCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Karin WeyerWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Chris GilpinWorld Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Catharina C BoehmeFIND, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marco SchitoHJF-DAIDS, A division of The Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, Maryland.
Michael KimerlingBill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, Washington.
Madhukar PaiMcGill International TB Centre and Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

Funding

NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272200800014CWellcome TrustWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To accelerate the fight against tuberculosis, major diagnostic challenges need to be addressed urgently. Post-2015 targets are unlikely to be met without the use of novel diagnostics that are more accurate and can be used closer to where patients first seek care in affordable diagnostic algorithms. This article describes the efforts by the stakeholder community that led to the identification of the high-priority diagnostic needs in tuberculosis. Subsequently target product profiles for the high-priority diagnostic needs were developed and reviewed in a World Health Organization (WHO)-led consensus meeting. The high-priority diagnostic needs included (1) a sputum-based replacement test for smear-microscopy; (2) a non-sputum-based biomarker test for all forms of tuberculosis, ideally suitable for use at levels below microscopy centers; (3) a simple, low cost triage test for use by first-contact care providers as a rule-out test, ideally suitable for use by community health workers; and (4) a rapid drug susceptibility test for use at the microscopy center level. The developed target product profiles, along with complimentary work presented in this supplement, will help to facilitate the interaction between the tuberculosis community and the diagnostics industry with the goal to lead the way toward the post-2015 global tuberculosis targets.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesBiomarkersBiomedical ResearchDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesSputumTuberculosisBiomarkersdiagnosispoint-of-careprioritizationtarget product profilestuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID25765104
PMCPMC4447829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.