ReviewAfrican health sciences2025
Uptake and rollout of the World Health Organization-endorsed technologies for Tuberculosis diagnosis in Africa: a literature review of international evidence 2007-2021.
Review in African health sciences, 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.
- Editorial: Infections, reproductive health and non-communicable diseases.African health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) has endorsed a range of diagnostic tuberculosis (TB) over the years. A little is documented about the uptake in the WHO African Region (WHO/FR). Objective: We assessed the uptake of the endorsed diagnostic technologies for tuberculosis through a literature review. Methods: We reviewed literature in French and English from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase for TB diagnostics endorsed by WHO between January 2007 and December 2017, extending to December 2021 for recent technologies. We included publications from the 47 countries in the WHO/AFR. Data were analyzed using PRISMA diagrams and STATA 14.0. Results: Out of 3,399 articles, 1,716 articles were screened, and 92 qualified for analysis. The majority of articles were on Xpert MTB/RIF (XPERT) 22 (47%), Line Probe Assay (LPA), 10 (21%), and Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) 9 (19%). For rollout, 11 (24%) of countries had publications on Lipoarabinomannan (LAM) and 16 (36%) on XPERT. The median years for uptake were 6 for MGIT, 5 for XPERT, and 2.5 for LPA. For the rollout, the median years for MGIT, LPA, and XPERT were 7, 6, and 5 respectively. Conclusion: Our study shows that the uptake and rollout are slow. Future studies should identify factors affecting rapid uptake and rollout.
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.