ArticlePloS one2025
Diagnostic accuracy of the TrueNat™ MTB plus assay for detecting pulmonary tuberculosis in adults.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic performance of Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra among smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis cases in southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia.IJID regions · 2026Article
- Current Landscape of Molecular Diagnostic Tests and Emerging Tools for Tuberculosis and Drug Resistance.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Reimagining tuberculosis elimination in India: diagnostics, drug resistance, and digital health strategies.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tuberculosis (TB), caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis remains a global threat, affecting 10.8 million people and causes 1.3 million deaths annually. Over 2.5 million cases go undiagnosed partly due to current diagnostic limitations. In particular, smear microscopy is less sensitive, culture is slow and prone to contamination, and the rapid Xpert® MTB/RIF Ultra (Ultra) needs advanced infrastructure. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of TrueNat™ MTB Plus assay (TrueNat), a portable, WHO-endorsed point-of-care tool, compared to Ultra, smear microscopy, and Löwenstein-Jensen (LJ) culture. This cross-sectional study enrolled 260 consenting adult participants (≥18 years) with presumptive TB in northern Tanzania. Participants' sputum samples were tested for M. tuberculosis using smear microscopy, LJ culture, Ultra and TrueNat. TrueNat performance was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and area under the curve (AUC) against the standard-of-care and a composite reference standard. Age and body-mass-index were summarised using median and interquatile range (IQR). Categorical variables were reported as proportions. Multivariate logistic regression identified TB predictors (p < 0.05). Data analysis and visualization were conducted using R. Among 260 participants, 165 (63.5%) were male, with a median age of 46.0 years (IQR: 35.5-57.3); 15 (5.8%) were HIV-positive, and 52 (20%) had undernutrition. TB was detected in 109 (41.9%) participants by at least one test. TrueNat showed sensitivity/specificity of 34.4%/94.7% vs. smear microscopy, 98.9%/95.3% vs. culture, and 86.2%/95.2% vs. Ultra. The AUC values were 0.75, 0.92, 0.96, and 0.91 compared to smear microscopy, LJ culture, Ultra, and a composite reference method, respectively. Participants reporting weight loss were 2.84 times more likely (95% CI: 1.68-4.84, p < 0.001) to test positive for TB by TrueNat. The TrueNat compared favorably to both Ultra and culture in terms of diagnostic accuracy, offering the added benefits of faster results and greater suitability for resource-limited settings. These findings suggest that TrueNat is a promising test for rapid TB detection in low-resource settings, warranting further studies to evaluate its implementation and impact on patient management.
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.