ArticleScientific reports2025
A clinical scoring system to predict tuberculous lymphadenitis in settings with high disease burden.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Limited diagnostic service availability challenges the timely diagnosis and treatment of tuberculous lymphadenitis, the most common extrapulmonary tuberculosis in endemic areas. To address this, our study aimed to develop a clinical scoring rule for estimating the likelihood of tuberculous lymphadenitis, designed as a simple and easy-to-apply classification tool to facilitate timely diagnosis. We used a cross-sectional study to collect data from 1364 patients with lymphadenopathy. A prediction model was developed by incorporating predictors from multivariable logistic regression analysis. Optimal cutoff point was determined using Youden's Index. Performance was evaluated using discrimination and calibration. Internal validation and clinical utility were assessed using bootstrapping and decision curve analysis, respectively. A total of 790 patients (57.9%, 95% CI 55.3%-60.5%) were diagnosed with tuberculous lymphadenitis. Sex, duration, size, location, and consistency of lymphadenopathy, presence of pain, sinus tract, systemic symptoms, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate were predictors incorporated to develop the scoring rule. With a discrimination power of 96.9% (95% CI 96.1%, 97.8%), the clinical scoring rule using these predictors showed a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 93.7%, 89.7%, and 92%, respectively. It demonstrated internal validity with near-zero optimism coefficients for various performance metrics. Using easily accessible clinical parameters, we developed a scoring rule that reliably predicts tuberculous lymphadenitis. Besides its use in clinical settings for making timely clinical decisions, the scoring rule is a valuable candidate for community-level screening, facilitating early case detection.
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.