ArticlePloS one2021
GeneXpert on patients with human immunodeficiency virus and smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Rapid Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Approaches for Use in the Clinical Laboratory.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Article
- Targeted Chromosomal Barcoding Establishes Direct Genotype-Phenotype Associations for Antibiotic Resistance in Mycobacterium abscessus.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- The Value of GeneXpert MTB/RIF for Detection in Tuberculosis: A Bibliometrics-Based Analysis and Review.Journal of analytical methods in chemistry · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesVietnam is a high-prevalence country for tuberculosis (TB). Xpert MTB/RIF is a novel PCR-based diagnostic test that is substantially more sensitive for detecting M. tuberculosis than traditional smear-based techniques. However, locally-derived evidence of Xpert MTB/RIF in HIV-infected people is limited. This study evaluates the performance of the Xpert MTB/RIF in HIV-infected patients with smear-negative pulmonary TB (SNTB).
methodsThis was a cross-sectional study in 3 hospitals. The performance of Xpert MTB/RIF was compared with the reference standard of liquid culture and phenotypic drug-susceptibility testing for rifampicin (RIF) resistance.
resultsOut of 123 patients, the median age was 37.0 (IQR: 32.0-41.0) and 81.3% were male. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of Xpert MTB/RIF for pulmonary TB diagnosis were 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-0.81), 66.7% (95%CI: 54.8-77.1) and 77.1% (95%CI: 62.7-88.0), respectively, while Se and Sp of Xpert MTB/RIF in detecting RIF resistance were 50.0 (11.8-88.2) and 86.4% (95%CI: 72.7-94.8).
conclusionThe performance of Xpert MTB/RIF in HIV-infected patients with SNTB for the diagnosis of TB and RIF-resistance was low. Further studies are required to evaluate the results of Xpert MTB/RIF assay in HIV-infected patients with SNTB and the role of Xpert repetition on the same specimens.
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.