ArticleIJTLD open2026
Diagnostic accuracy of TB-LAMP and smear microscopy for pulmonary TB in active case finding.
Article in IJTLD open, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Nepal, most sputum tests are done with smear microscopy. However, in order to increase case detection by active case finding (ACF), more sensitive bacteriological test should be used.
methodsPresumptive TB cases aged five and over detected by symptomatic screening and X-ray screening for pulmonary TB were included in the study. Smear microscopy, loop-mediated isothermal-amplification for TB (TB-LAMP), and Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) were performed as part of routine TB diagnostic procedure in ACF. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of TB-LAMP and smear microscopy by using Xpert as the microbiological reference standard.
resultsAmong 653 samples, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa value of smear microscopy and TB-LAMP were 30.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.6-41.1), 99.8% (95% CI: 99.0-99.9), 0.43 (95% CI: 0.36-0.49) and 72.0% (95% CI: 61.4-80.5), 99.7% (95% CI: 98.7-99.9), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.73-0.88), respectively. Sensitivity of TB-LAMP (72.0%) was 41.5% higher than that of smear microscopy (30.5%) (
conclusionSensitivity of TB-LAMP was much higher than that of smear microscopy in ACF. TB-LAMP is recommended to replace smear microscopy in ACF to increase the detection of bacteriologically confirmed pulmonary TB.
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.