ArticleJournal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases2019
Chest x-ray findings in tuberculosis patients identified by passive and active case finding: A retrospective study.
Article in Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases, 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.
- Association between treatment outcomes and extent of chest X-ray involvement among pulmonary tuberculosis patients under RNTCP in North India: A prospective study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Early diagnosis and meta-agnostic model visualization of tuberculosis based on radiography images.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Superimposed Pulmonary Tuberculosis (PTB) in a 26-Year-Old Female with No Underlying Co-Morbidities Recovering from COVID-19-Case Report.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2023Article
- Cascaded deep learning classifiers for computer-aided diagnosis of COVID-19 and pneumonia diseases in X-ray scans.Complex & intelligent systems · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest x-ray is central in screening and diagnosis of tuberculosis. However, sputum culture remains gold standard for diagnosis.
aimTo establish the rate of normal chest x-rays in tuberculosis patients found by spot sputum culture screening, and compare them to a group identified through passive case finding.
methodChest x-rays from 39 culture-positive patients, identified by spot sputum culture screening in Copenhagen from 2012 to 2014, were included in the study (spot sputum culture group(SSC)). 39 normal chest x-rays from persons screened by mobile x-ray, and 39 chest x-rays from tuberculosis-patients identified through passive case finding(PCF) were anonymised and randomised. Two respiratory physicians and two radiologists assessed the chest x-rays.
resultsThe normal chest x-ray rate was higher in the non-tuberculosis control group (median = 32 (82.1%), range = 74.4% - 100%), compared to the SSC group (median = 7 (17.9%), range = 10.3% - 33.3%), and the PCF controls (median = 3(7.7%), range = 2.6% - 15.4%). In the SSC group 14 (35.9%) were categorized as normal by at least one study participant.
conclusionA substantial minority of patients diagnosed with tuberculosis by spot sputum culture screening, and through passive case finding would not have been identified with chest x-ray alone, highlighting that a normal chest x-ray does not exclude pulmonary tuberculosis.
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.