ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
Diagnostic accuracy of Truenat in extrapulmonary tuberculosis.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Diagnosing extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB) remains a challenge even in today's era. Truenat, an indigenously developed nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), has reported high sensitivity and specificity in sputum samples. However, its role in EPTB is still debatable. Objective: To compare the efficacy of Truenat with other diagnostic modalities, like acid-fast bacilli (AFB) smear, mycobacterial culture, and a composite reference standard. Materials and Methods: All patients suspected of EPTB were included in the study. The patients were evaluated based on a detailed clinical history, physical examination, and routine blood investigations. Specific samples from appropriate sites were collected and sent for Truenat, AFB smear, and liquid culture, and the results were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Strata 19.0. Results: We included a total of 235 patients with a male:female ratio 1.9:1. Pleural effusion was the most common form of EPTB. The smear positivity was 16.6%. The Truenat positivity was 45.1%, with the highest in pus (56.5%), followed by lymphnode (67.80%) and pleural fluid (41.5%). The culture positivity was 34.9%. In comparison to AFB smear, the overall sensitivity and specificity of Truenat were 100% and 65.82%, respectively; the positive predictive value was 36.79%, while the negative predictive value was 100%. Comparing Truenat with culture revealed a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 79.27%, 73.2%, 61.32%, and 86.82%, respectively. Conclusion: Truenat carries a high sensitivity and specificity for most EPTB samples in our study. A larger-scale study with a larger and uniform number of samples is recommended for more appropriate results.
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.