SynthesisBioscience reports2020
Pooled analysis of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for diagnosing tuberculous meningitis.
Synthesis in Bioscience reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for diagnosing tuberculous meningitis.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of T-SPOT.TB Assay for Tuberculous Meningitis: An Updated Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Pooled it
- Evaluation of Lateral-Flow Assay for Rapid Detection of Influenza Virus.BioMed research international · 2020Pooled it
- Diagnosis of Tuberculous Meningitis: Integrating Clinical Assessment and Molecular Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The challenges of an unusual case of miliary tuberculosis control: A case report from Syria.Radiology case reports · 2024Article
- Nanopore-targeted sequencing (NTS) for intracranial tuberculosis: a promising and reliable approach.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2024Article
- A novel diagnostic model for tuberculous meningitis using Bayesian latent class analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Observational
- Tuberculous meningitis diagnosis and treatment: classic approaches and high-throughput pathways.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Advancing Diagnosis and Treatment in People Living with HIV and Tuberculosis Meningitis.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2023Review
- Evaluation of Xpert GBS assay and Xpert GBS LB assay for detection of Streptococcus agalactiae.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2021Article
- Pooled Analysis of the Accuracy of Xpert Ebola Assay for Diagnosing Ebola Virus Infection.BioMed research international · 2021Review
- Comparison of metagenomic next-generation sequencing technology, culture and GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay in the diagnosis of tuberculosis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculous meningitis (TBM) is one of the most serious types of extrapulmonary tuberculosis. However, low sensitivity of culture of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) increases the difficulty in clinical diagnosis, leading to diagnostic delay, and misdiagnosis. Xpert MTB/RIF assay is a rapid and simple method to detect tuberculosis. However, the efficacy of this technique in diagnosing TBM remains unclear. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of Xpert MTB/RIF for TBM, which may enhance the development of early diagnosis of TBM.
methodsRelevant studies in the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were retrieved using the keywords 'Xpert MTB/RIF', 'tuberculous meningitis (TBM)'. The pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, summary receiver operator characteristic curve, and area under the curve (AUC) of Xpert MTB/RIF were determined and analyzed.
resultsA total of 162 studies were enrolled and only 14 met the criteria for meta-analysis. The overall pooled sensitivity of Xpert MTB/RIF was 63% [95% confidence interval (CI), 59-66%], while the overall pooled specificity was 98.1% (95% CI, 97.5-98.5%). The pooled values of positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were 20.91% (12.71-52.82%), 0.40% (0.32-0.50%), and 71.49% (32.64-156.56%), respectively. The AUC was 0.76.
conclusionsXpert MTB/RIF exhibited high specificity in diagnosing TBM in CSF samples, but its sensitivity was relatively low. It is necessary to combine other high-sensitive detection methods for the early diagnosis of TBM. Moreover, the centrifugation of CSF samples was found to be beneficial in improving the sensitivity.
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.