ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2019
Evaluation of a manual identification system for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a primary tuberculosis laboratory in China.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical significance of CA-125 in elderly patients with active pulmonary tuberculosis: A retrospective study.Saudi medical journal · 2022Article
- Multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistantJournal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2022Article
- New management approaches to tuberculosis in people living with HIV.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Time to Detection of Growth forFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the diagnostic performance of the manual BACTEC™ Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT™) system (M-MGIT) with the automated BACTEC™ MGIT™ 960 system (A-MGIT) and Löwenstein-Jensen (L-J) culture method in detecting mycobacteria in sputum specimens from patients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis (TB).
methodsFor this cross-sectional study, sputum samples were taken from patients aged ≥18 years attending a TB clinic in Beijing, China between July 2015 and October 2016. Processed sputum samples were inoculated into the MGIT systems and L-J medium for up to 6 and 8 weeks, respectively.
resultsThe M-MGIT and A-MGIT methods detected significantly more Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTC) isolates than L-J culture from the 565 sputum samples (39%, 40% and 32%, respectively). Using a positive result from any of the three culture systems as reference, the sensitivity of M-MGIT, A-MGIT and L-J methods were 92%, 94%, and 74%, respectively. The time-to-detection of mycobacteria was 12.9±4.2 days for M-MGIT, 11.8±5.2 days for A-MGIT and 24.2±8.7 days for L-J.
conclusionsM-MGIT has a similar diagnostic performance to A-MGIT, and is a fast and reliable alternative to conventional culture methods in the diagnosis of pulmonary TB in a developing country.
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.