Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32702008›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Pragmatic accuracy of an in-house loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis in a Thai community hospital.

Sarawut Toonkomdang, Phichayut Phinyo, Benjawan Phetsuksiri, Jayanton Patumanond, Janisara Rudeeaneksin, Wiphat Klayut

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Tracking SARS-CoV-2: Novel Trends and Diagnostic Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  7. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sarawut ToonkomdangDepartment of Medical Technology, Maesot General Hospital, Tak, Thailand.
Phichayut PhinyoDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-8543-6254
Benjawan PhetsuksiriDepartment of Medical Sciences, National Institute of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Jayanton PatumanondCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Janisara RudeeaneksinDepartment of Medical Sciences, National Institute of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Wiphat KlayutDepartment of Medical Sciences, National Institute of Health, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Ministry of Public Health · THChiang Mai University · THMaesot General Hospital · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo improve the quality of diagnosing pulmonary tuberculosis (TB), WHO recommends the use of rapid molecular testing as an alternative to conventional microscopic methods. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay (LAMP test) is a practical and cost-effective nucleic amplification technique. We evaluated the pragmatic accuracy of an in-house LAMP assay for the diagnosis of TB in a remote health care setting where an advanced rapid molecular test is not available.

methodsA prospective diagnostic accuracy study was conducted. Patients with clinical symptoms suggestive of TB were consecutively enrolled from April to August 2016. Sputum samples were collected from each patient and were sent for microscopic examination (both acid-fast stain and fluorescence stain), in-house LAMP test, and TB culture.

resultsOne hundred and seven patients with TB symptoms were used in the final analysis. This included 50 (46.7%) culture-positive TB patients and 57 (53.3%) culture-negative patients. The overall sensitivity of the in-house LAMP based on culture positivity was 88.8% (95/107) with a 95%CI of 81.2-94.1. The sensitivity was 90.9% (40/44) with a 95%CI of 78.3-97.5 for smear-positive, culture-positive patients, and was 16.7% (1/6) with a 95%CI of 0.4-64.1 for smear-negative, culture-positive patients. The overall sensitivity of the in-house LAMP test compared to smear microscopy methods were not significantly different (p = 0.375). The specificity of the in-house LAMP based on non-TB patients (smear-negative, culture-negative) was 94.7% (54/57) with a 95%CI of 85.4-98.9.

conclusionsThe diagnostic accuracy of the in-house LAMP test in a community hospital was comparable to other previous reports in terms of specificity. The sensitivity of the in-house assay could be improved with better sputum processing and DNA extraction method.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Tests, RoutineFemaleHospitals, CommunityHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesMycobacterium tuberculosisNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesProspective StudiesSputumThailandTuberculosis, Pulmonary

Identifiers

PMID32702008
PMCPMC7377475
OpenAlexW3044865733

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.