SynthesisBioMed research international2019
Diagnostic Accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF Assay for Lymph Node Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Exploring the accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay in detecting lymph node tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF assays for extrapulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for tuberculous pericarditis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of Mycobacterium tuberculosis cell-free DNA for tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Xpert MTB/RIF assay for diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Metagenomic next generation sequencing for the diagnosis of tuberculosis meningitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Anlotinib for refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for bone and joint tuberculosis: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Improved detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in lymph node aspirates through GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay in Bangladesh.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- The diagnostic accuracy of nanopore sequencing in Tuberculous Lymphadenitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.PloS one · 2025Article
- Silicotuberculosis: a critical narrative review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Review
- Evaluation of GeneXpert MTB/Rif Ultra assay performance on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues forJournal of medical microbiology · 2024Article
- Targeted nanopore sequencing using clinical specimens for the rapid diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Article
- 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosis of primary central nervous system lymphoma: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Nanopore Sequencing for Diagnosing Pulmonary Tuberculosis Using Negative Smear Clinical Specimens.Infection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Diagnostic validity of MRI for central nervous system tuberculosis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Application ofInfection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Comparison of the Accuracy of Two Different Molecular Tests for the Diagnosis of Tuberculous Lymphadenitis Using Core Needle Biopsy Specimens: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF for lymph node tuberculosis (LNTB).
methodsWe searched databases for published reports. We reviewed the studies and identified the performance of Xpert MTB/RIF with respect to a composite reference standard (CRS) and culture. We used a bivariate random-effects model to perform meta-analyses and used metaregression to analyze sources of heterogeneity.
results15 independent studies compared Xpert MTB/RIF with CRS while 21 comparing it with culture were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of Xpert MTB/RIF were 79% and 98% compared to that of CRS, respectively, and 84% and 91% compared to that of culture, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity using fine needle aspiration (FNA) samples versus CRS were 80% and 96%, whereas those against culture were 90% and 89%, respectively. The percentages while working with tissue samples versus CRS were 76% and 100%, respectively, whereas those against culture were 76% and 92%, respectively. There was no significant difference in diagnostic efficiency among the types of specimen.
conclusionsXpert MTB/RIF demonstrates good diagnostic efficiency for LNTB and is not related to the type of specimen, obtained via different routes.
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.