ArticleCurrent issues in molecular biology2025
New Tool Against Tuberculosis: The Potential of the LAMP Lateral Flow Assay in Resource-Limited Settings.
Article in Current issues in molecular biology, 2025. 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.
- Advances in Molecular Microbiology-From Recent Advances to the Future.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
- Molecular Epidemiology ofMicroorganisms · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tuberculosis (TB) is a global public health issue requiring early and accurate diagnosis. The loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay is a promising alternative recommended by the WHO for the initial diagnosis of pulmonary TB, particularly in resource-limited settings. This study evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of a commercial LAMP assay for TB detection using 198 samples from different countries including Mexico. The LAMP assay results were compared to the results of standard tests: AFB smear microscopy, cell culture, and Xpert PCR. Across all samples, LAMP showed a sensitivity of 96.20% and a specificity of 84.61%. When compared specifically to "true positives" and "true negatives" (defined by the consistency across the standard tests), LAMP demonstrated 100% sensitivity and 92.30% specificity. For context, the sensitivity of AFB smear microscopy against the culture and Xpert tests was 79.04%. A significant finding was that the LAMP test detected a high percentage (92.5%) of samples found positive by the culture and Xpert tests but negative by the AFB smear, highlighting its ability to identify cases missed by traditional microscopy. This study concluded that the LAMP assay is a sensitive and specific tool for TB diagnosis with potential for rapid and accurate diagnosis, especially in resource-limited areas.
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.