ArticleHeliyon2024
Diagnostic scoring systems for tuberculous pleural effusion in patients with lymphocyte-predominant exudative pleural profile: A development study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodological and applicability pitfalls of clinical prediction models for asthma diagnosis: a systematic review and critical appraisal of evidence.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Pooled it
- Transthoracic ultrasound features to differentiate tuberculous from malignant pleural effusion: development of a machine learning-based clinical prediction model.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Tired of the confusion around pleural effusions: Adenosine deaminase detection sets the record straight!World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- A scoring model based on the pleural effusion adenosine deaminase-to-serum C-reactive protein ratio for differentiating tuberculous pleural effusion from non-tuberculous benign pleural effusion.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Etiology of exudative pleural effusion among adults: differentiating between tuberculous and other causes, a multicenter prospective cohort study.IJID regions · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diagnosing tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) in patients presenting with Lymphocyte-Predominant Exudative pleural effusion (LPE) is challenging, due to the poor clinical utility of TB culture. Adenosine deaminase (ADA) has been recommended for diagnosis, but its high cost and limited availability hinder its clinical utility. We aim to develop diagnostic prediction tools for Thai patients with LPE in scenarios where pleural fluid ADA is available but yields negative results and in situations where pleural fluid ADA is not available. Methods: Two diagnostic prediction tools were developed using retrospective data from patients with LPE at Surin Hospital. Model 1 is for ADA-negative results, and Model 2 is for situations where pleural fluid ADA testing is unavailable. The models were derived using multivariable logistic regression and presented as two clinical scoring systems: round-up and count scoring. The score cut-point that achieves a positive predictive value (PPV) comparable to the post-test probability of a pleural fluid ADA at a cut-point of 40 U/L was used as a threshold for initiating anti-TB treatment. Results: A total of 359 patients were eligible for analysis, with 166 diagnosed with TPE and 193 diagnosed with non-TPE. Age <40 years, fever, pleural fluid protein ≥5 g/dL, male gender, pleural fluid color, and pleural fluid ADA ≥20 U/L were identified as final predictors. Both models demonstrated excellent discriminative ability (AuROC: 0.85 to 0.89). The round-up scoring demonstrated PPV above 90% at cut-off points of 4 and 4.5, while the count scoring achieved cut-off points of 3 and 4 for Model 1 (Lex-2P2A) and Model 2 (Lex-2P-MAC), respectively. Conclusion: These diagnostic tools offer valuable assistance in differentiating between TPE and non-TPE in LPE patients with negative pleural fluid ADA (Lex-2P2A) and in settings where pleural fluid ADA testing is not available (Lex-2P-MAC). Implementing these diagnostic scores may have the potential to improve TPE diagnosis and facilitate prompt initiation of treatment.
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.