ArticleJournal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases2019
Diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis by pooling induced sputum.
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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening performance of C-reactive protein for active pulmonary tuberculosis in HIV-positive patients: A systematic review with a meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Etiologic Investigation of Patients Diagnosed with Bacteriologically Unconfirmed Tuberculosis in Tanzania.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2023Article
- Comparable detection of nasopharyngeal swabs and induced sputum specimens for viral nucleic acid detection of suspected novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) patients in Fayoum governorate, Egypt.Beni-Suef University journal of basic and applied sciences · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) remains fundamental in reducing transmissions and death. Sputum induction is recommended for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) in patients who are unable to expectorate or smear negative.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of pooling two induced sputum specimens into one microbiological test over a single day for the diagnosis of PTB.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled consecutive hospitalized adults with suspected PTB from 2009-2016. Two induced sputum specimens were obtained on the same day and pooled together for AFB smear, culture and Xpert MTB/RIF testing. The final diagnosis of PTB was based on a positive culture from any respiratory specimen. All patients were followed up for 3 months.
resultsOf 420 patients, 86(20.5%) were diagnosed with PTB based on a positive respiratory culture. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for pooled induced sputum were 98.8% (CI 93.7-100%), 100% (CI 98.9-100%) and 100% (94.6-100%) and 99.7% (CI 98.1-100%) respectively. Xpert MTB/RIF in pooled induced sputum was positive in 88.4% of the PTB patients.
conclusionIn the diagnosis of PTB, testing two induced sputum specimens which were pooled together for one microbiological testing process may be comparable to repeat testing.
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.