ArticleInternational journal of circumpolar health2020
Rapid detection of tuberculosis in remote Alaska.
Article in International journal of circumpolar health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a remote region of western Alaska where tuberculosis (TB) incidence remains relatively high, a rapid molecular detection assay (Xpert MTB/RIF) was introduced four years ago with goal of improving the ability to diagnose active pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). Our aggressive testing programme was intended for all patients acutely evaluated for pulmonary TB at our regional hospital and multiple clinics over a large area. All 223 consecutive patients evaluated for active pulmonary TB were tested with Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) per our protocol of which 192 (86.1%) had at least one additional (paired) sputum sample collected for standard acid-fast bacilli (smear) microscopy and culture. Fourteen patients eventually became culture-positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB), all but one having initially tested positive (MTB detected) by Xpert (sensitivity 92.9%). All remaining culture-negative individuals had tested negative (not detected) by Xpert (specificity 100%). By contrast, smear microscopy sensitivity and specificity was 64.3% and 98.9% respectively. This represents the addition of four active TB patients detected by Xpert over smear. In remote regions, the ability of Xpert to quickly and reliably detect TB while determine which patients are not contagious represents a huge healthcare savings as in most cases these patients will not require hospitalized isolation.
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.