ArticleRevista de saude publica2024
Evaluation of the GeneXpert MTB/RIF to diagnose tuberculosis in a public health laboratory.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fifteen years of tuberculosis and HIV diagnostic services in Brazil: disruption, regional disparities, and recovery before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic.IJID regions · 2025Article
- Magnitude and trends ofThe Pan African medical journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the performance of geneXpert MTB/Rif versus conventional methods (bacilloscopy and culture) in the diagnosis of tuberculosis in a Central Public Health Laboratory (LACEN, Tocantins), Northern Brazil.
methodsRetrospective study, with information from 1,973 suspected cases of tuberculosis from patients treated from January 2015 to December 2020.
resultsFrom the culture (reference standard), the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the geneXpert MTB/Rif were 100%, 97%, 74%, 100%, and 97%, respectively, against 85%, 98%, 80%, 98%, and 97% of bacilloscopy.
conclusionsThe geneXpert MTB/Rif performed similarly to culture and better than bacilloscopy. Although positive cases with negative culture should be evaluated with caution, its routine use is important for the early detection of tuberculosis.
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.