Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38947060›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024

Innovative COVID-19 Point-of-Care Diagnostics Suitable for Tuberculosis Diagnosis: A Scoping Review.

Lydia Holtgrewe, Sonal Jain, Ralitza Dekova, Tobias Broger, Chris Isaacs, Payam Nahid, Adithya Cattamanchi, Claudia M Denkinger, Seda Yerlikaya

Abstract readPreprintScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Rapid and accurate point-of-care (POC) tuberculosis (TB) diagnostics are a key priority to close the TB diagnostic gap of 3.1 million people without a diagnosis. Leveraging the recent surge in COVID-19 diagnostic innovation, we explored the potential adaptation of commercially available SARS-CoV-2 tests for TB diagnosis, aligning with World Health Organization (WHO) target product profiles (TPPs). Methods: A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR guidelines to systematically map commercially available POC molecular and antigen SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests potentially meeting the TPPs for TB diagnostic tests for peripheral settings. Data were gathered from PubMed/MEDLINE, bioRxiv, and medRxiv, along with publicly accessible in vitro diagnostic test databases, and developer websites, up to November 23, 2022. Data on developer and test attributes, operational characteristics, pricing, and clinical performance were charted using standardized data extraction forms. Each identified test was evaluated using a standardized scorecard. A narrative synthesis of the charted data is presented. Results: Our database search yielded 2,003 studies, from which 408 were considered eligible. Among these, we identified 58 commercialized diagnostic devices, including 17 near-POC antigen tests, one POC molecular test, 29 near-POC molecular tests, and 11 low-complexity molecular tests. We summarized the detailed characteristics, regulatory status, and clinical performance data of these tests. The LumiraDx (Roche, Switzerland) emerged as the highest- scoring near-POC antigen platform, while Visby (Visby, USA) was the highest-performing near-POC molecular platform. The Lucira Check-It (Pfizer, USA) was noted as the sole POC molecular test. The Idylla Discussion: We highlight a diverse landscape of commercially available diagnostic tests suitable for potential adaptation to TB POC testing. This work aims to bolster global TB initiatives by fostering stakeholder collaboration, leveraging COVID-19 diagnostic technologies for TB diagnosis, and uncovering new commercial avenues to tackle longstanding challenges in TB diagnosis.

Identifiers

PMID38947060
PMCPMC11213065

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.