ArticleScientific reports2016
Pilot study of a rapid and minimally instrumented sputum sample preparation method for molecular diagnosis of tuberculosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- EliminateJournal of medical microbiology · 2026Article
- Innovative COVID-19 Point-of-Care Diagnostics Suitable for Tuberculosis Diagnosis: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Advances in point-of-care nucleic acid extraction technologies for rapid diagnosis of human and plant diseases.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2020Review
- Integrated nucleic acid testing system to enable TB diagnosis in peripheral settings.Lab on a chip · 2020Article
- Low-Resource Nucleic Acid Extraction Method Enabled by High-Gradient Magnetic Separation.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2020Article
- Article
- Advances in Directly Amplifying Nucleic Acids from Complex Samples.Biosensors · 2019Review
- Closed-type pre-treatment device for point-of-care testing of sputum.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Semiquantitative Nucleic Acid Test with Simultaneous Isotachophoretic Extraction and Amplification.Analytical chemistry · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) enables rapid and sensitive diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB), which facilitates treatment and mitigates transmission. Nucleic acid extraction from sputum constitutes the greatest technical challenge in TB NAAT for near-patient settings. This report presents preliminary data for a semi-automated sample processing method, wherein sputum is disinfected and liquefied, followed by PureLyse(®) mechanical lysis and solid-phase nucleic acid extraction in a miniaturized, battery-operated bead blender. Sputum liquefaction and disinfection enabled a >10(4) fold reduction in viable load of cultured Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb) spiked into human sputum, which mitigates biohazard concerns. Sample preparation via the PureLyse(®) method and a clinically validated manual method enabled positive PCR-based detection for sputum spiked with 10(4) and 10(5) colony forming units (cfu)/mL M.tb. At 10(3) cfu/mL sputum, four of six and two of six samples amplified using the comparator and PureLyse(®) method, respectively. For clinical specimens from TB cases and controls, the two methods provided 100% concordant results for samples with 1 mL input volume (N = 41). The semi-automated PureLyse(®) method therefore performed similarly to a validated manual comparator method, but is faster, minimally instrumented, and can be integrated into TB molecular diagnostic platforms designed for near-patient low-resource settings.
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.