ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2023
ddPCR provides a sensitive test compared with GeneXpert MTB/RIF and mNGS for suspected
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in pulmonary tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative whole genome analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolated from BPaLM and individualized regimen treated patients at Dr. Soetomo Hospital, Indonesia.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a new droplet digital PCR for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis and tuberculous pleurisy.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A High Sensitive Detection of Droplet Digital PCR for the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Rapid Molecular Diagnostics of Tuberculosis: What Do We Have, What Do We Need?Pulmonary medicine · 2026Review
- ddPCR-based profiling of plasma EV-miRNA identifies a noninvasive biomarker panel for tuberculosis.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Hierarchical integration of mNGS, PCR, and other conventional methods for precision TB diagnostics.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of the clinical characteristic and lung microbiota in adult and elderly patients with pulmonary tuberculosis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Establishment and validation of a dual qPCR method for the detection of carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Comparison and evaluation of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and real-time PCR for the detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Intensive reprocessing of reusable bronchoscopes can reduce the false positive rate of Xpert MTB/RIF caused by nucleic acid residue.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2024Article
- Present and Future Applications of Digital PCR in Infectious Diseases Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Metagenomics next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay (Xpert) exhibited a sensitivity for tuberculosis (TB) diagnostic performance. Research that directly compared the clinical performance of ddPCR analysis, mNGS, and Xpert in Methods: The study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ddPCR compared to mNGS and Xpert for the detection of MTB in multiple types of clinical samples. The final clinical diagnosis was used as the reference standard. Results: Out of 236 patients with suspected active TB infection, 217 underwent synchronous testing for tuberculosis using ddPCR, Xpert, and mNGS on direct clinical samples. During follow-up, 100 out of 217 participants were diagnosed with MTB infection. Compared to the clinical final diagnosis, ddPCR produced the highest sensitivity of 99% compared with mNGS (86%) and Xpert (64%) for all active MTB cases. Discussion: Twenty-two Xpert-negative samples were positive in mNGS tests, which confirmed the clinical diagnosis results from ddPCR and clinical manifestation, radiologic findings. Thirteen mNGS-negative samples were positive in ddPCR assays, which confirmed the clinical final diagnosis.ddPCR provides a higher sensitive compared to Xpert and mNGS for MTB diagnosis, as defined by the high concordance between ddPCR assay and clinical final diagnosis.
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.