Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36482950›Full record

ReviewLe infezioni in medicina2022

Why do we miss isolated male genital tuberculosis diagnosis?

Youssef Retal, Youssef Kharbach, Abdelhak Khallouk

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Le infezioni in medicina, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Youssef RetalFaculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Abdelmalek Essaâdi University, Tangier, Morocco.
Youssef KharbachUrology Department, Tangier-Tetouan-Alhoceima University Hospital, Tangier, Morocco.
Abdelhak KhalloukUrology Department, Tangier-Tetouan-Alhoceima University Hospital, Tangier, Morocco.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tuberculosis remains a worldwide health problem. It can affect the entire genitourinary tract. Tuberculosis of male genital tract still presents a diagnostic dilemma because of its varied presentations and the unavailability of sensitive and specific investigations. "Urogenital tuberculosis" is the most common term used in the literature. Male genital tuberculosis (MGTB) is usually reviewed together with urinary tract tuberculosis because often both sites are involved simultaneously; however, this is not always the case and current terminology may need to be modified. Until now, little importance has been given to isolated MGTB diagnosis. The current methods used for diagnosis are not adequate and the optimal strategy warrants further studies with a special attention on the evaluation of sperm investigations. In this review, we aim to establish a summary on the type of tuberculosis affecting only the male genital tract. We recommend that the diagnosis of MGTB should be made taking into consideration the epidemiological data, the clinical presentation, and performance of latest molecular or immunological tools from urine, sperm, blood, other fluids or tissue specimens.

Indexed as

diagnosisextrapulmonary tuberculosisIsolated male genital tuberculosisterminologyurogenital tuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID36482950
PMCPMC9715008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.