Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31029099›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2019

Effect of two alternative methods of pooling sputum prior to testing for tuberculosis with genexpert MTB/RIF.

Nguyen Thi Bich Phuong, Nguyen Thu Anh, Nguyen Van Son, Vitali Sintchenko, Jennifer Ho, Greg J Fox, Nguyen Viet Nhung, Guy B Marks

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Population-wide active case finding as a strategy to end TB.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024
    Review
  3. Pooling Sputum Samples for Efficient Mass Tuberculosis Screening in Prisons.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2022
    Article
  4. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nguyen Thi Bich PhuongWoolcock Institute of Medical Research, 298 Kim Ma street, Ba Dinh district, Ha Noi, Vietnam. phuong.nguyen@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0755-6944
Nguyen Thu AnhWoolcock Institute of Medical Research, 298 Kim Ma street, Ba Dinh district, Ha Noi, Vietnam.
Nguyen Van SonCentre for Social Disease Control, Ca Mau, Vietnam.
Vitali SintchenkoFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Jennifer HoWoolcock Institute of Medical Research, 298 Kim Ma street, Ba Dinh district, Ha Noi, Vietnam.
Greg J FoxWoolcock Institute of Medical Research, 298 Kim Ma street, Ba Dinh district, Ha Noi, Vietnam.
Nguyen Viet NhungNational TB Control Program, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Guy B MarksWoolcock Institute of Medical Research, 298 Kim Ma street, Ba Dinh district, Ha Noi, Vietnam.
The University of Sydney · AUSouth Western Sydney Local Health District · AUWoolcock Institute of Medical Research · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council ACTRN12614000372684
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPooling sputum specimens is one potential strategy for reducing the cost of using Xpert MTB/RIF, a rapid polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based test, for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis. We sought to compare the sensitivity of two alternative method of pooling.

methodsPatients referred for assessment for TB, whose initial sputum was Xpert MTB positive, were recruited and their sputum specimens were pooled for analysis with sputum specimens that were Xpert MTB negative. Two alternative pooling strategies were employed: one in which the concentration of sample reagent (buffer) was maintained at 2:1 (standard), in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, and another in which the concentration of sample reagent was reduced to 1:1.

resultsWe tested 101 Xpert MTB positive sputum specimens. Among these, 96% of valid test results (95% confidence interval (CI) 89-99%) were positive using the "standard buffer method". Using the "reduced buffer pooling" method 94% of valid test results (95% CI 87-98%) were positive. McNemar's test for the difference in paired proportions did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.56).

conclusionWe have confirmed that pooling of two sputum specimens for testing in a single cartridge is a valid method of reducing the number of cartridges required when using Xpert MTB to detect pulmonary tuberculosis. Two alternative pooling strategies tested here yielded similar results.

trial registrationThe present study was conducted within the Active Casefinding in Tuberculosis (ACT3) Trial. The ACT3 Trial had been registered with Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register on 8th April, 2014. The trial registration number is ACTRN12614000372684 . (Retrospectively registered).

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesDNA, BacterialHumansMycobacterium tuberculosisPolymerase Chain ReactionReagent Kits, DiagnosticSensitivity and SpecificitySputumTuberculosisDNA, BacterialReagent Kits, DiagnosticDiagnostic test characteristicsNucleic acid amplificationSensitivity

Identifiers

PMID31029099
PMCPMC6486971
OpenAlexW2947694694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.