ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2017
Clinical Impact of Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing in the Diagnosis of
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance and Cost-Efficiency of an MPT64 Assay for DetectingJournal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Article
- Use of Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing for Rapid Detection ofOpen forum infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Delays in Isolating Patients Admitted to Hospital with Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Korea.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- Impact of nucleic acid amplification test on pulmonary tuberculosis notifications and treatments in Taiwan: a 7-year single-center cohort study.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNucleic acid amplification (NAA) testing for
methodsWe identified a retrospective cohort of all patients with AFB smear-positive respiratory specimens at Henry Ford Hospital from January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2011. We examined the association between patients' sociodemographic factors and clinical comorbidities with the likelihood of being diagnosed with MTB. We evaluated the projected change in duration of airborne isolation and unnecessary MTB treatment with introducing NAA testing into clinical decision making for AFB smear-positive patients.
resultsOne hundred thirty patients had AFB smear-positive respiratory specimens, 80 of these patients had a positive NAA test result, and 82 patients grew MTB on culture. Nucleic acid amplification testing had a sensitivity and specificity of 97.6% and 100%, respectively. Integrating NAA testing into clinical decision making for patients with AFB-positive smears was associated with a significantly shorter time in airborne isolation (6.0 ± 7.6 vs 23.1 ± 38.0,
conclusionsNucleic acid amplification testing provided a rapid and accurate test in the diagnosis of MTB while significantly reducing the duration of isolation and unnecessary medications in patients with negative NAA test.
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.