ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2023
Face mask sampling (FMS) for tuberculosis shows lower diagnostic sensitivity than sputum sampling in Guinea.
Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Closing gaps through innovation in the tuberculosis pathology value chain.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2026Review
- Improving tuberculosis diagnosis: evaluation of tongue swabbing as a complementary method to sputum analysis in Guinea.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2025Article
- AveloMask, a novel breath aerosol collection kit for airborneJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Assessing Infectiousness and the Impact of Effective Treatment to Guide Isolation Recommendations for People With Pulmonary Tuberculosis.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2025Review
- Non-sputum-based samples and biomarkers for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis: the hope to improve childhood and HIV-associated tuberculosis diagnosis.European journal of medical research · 2024Review
- Innovative COVID-19 Point-of-Care Diagnostics Suitable for Tuberculosis Diagnosis: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) diagnosis relies on sputum examination, a challenge in sputum-scarce patients. Alternative non-invasive sampling methods such as face mask sampling (FMS) have been proposed.
objectiveTo evaluate the value of FMS for PTB diagnosis by assessing its agreement with sputum samples processed by GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Ultra)(Xpert) testing, and describe FMS sensitivity and specificity.
methodsThis was a prospective study conducted at the Carrière TB clinic in Guinea. Presumptive TB patients willing to participate were asked to wear a surgical mask containing a polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) strip for thirty minutes. Subsequently, two spot sputum samples were collected, of which one was processed by microscopy on site and the other by Xpert in Guinea's National Reference Laboratory of Mycobacteriology (LNRM). The first 30 FMS were processed at the Supranational Reference Laboratory in Antwerp, Belgium, and the following 118 FMS in the LNRM.
resultsOne hundred fifty patients participated, of whom 148 had valid results for both mask and sputum. Sputum smear microscopy was positive for 47 (31.8%) patients while sputum-Xpert detected MTB in 54 (36.5%) patients. Among the 54 patients testing sputum-Xpert positive, 26 (48.1%) yielded a positive FMS-Xpert result, while four sputum-Xpert negative patients tested positive for FMS and 90 patients were Xpert-negative for both sputum and mask samples, suggesting a moderate level of agreement (k-value of 0.47). The overall mask sensitivity was 48.1%, with 95.7% specificity.
conclusionIn our setting, Xpert testing on FMS did not yield a high level of agreement to sputum sample.
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.