ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2026
Diagnostic Performance of Nanopore-targeted Sequencing for Sputum Smear-negative Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of nanopore-targeted sequencing (NTS) for sputum smear-negative pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB). Methods: In this retrospective study, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid from patients with suspected PTB and negative sputum smears was tested with NTS, Xpert MTB/RIF, and MGIT 960 culture at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital (August 2022-March 2024). Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated against both microbiological and composite reference standards. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated and Youden's index was employed to determine the optimal NTS cutoff. Results: Among the 249 participants enrolled, 100 were microbiologically confirmed PTB, 33 were probable PTB, and 116 were tuberculosis-negative. Under microbiological reference standard, the sensitivity of NTS was 0.940 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.869-0.975), higher than Xpert MTB/RIF (0.840 [95% CI, 0.750-0.903]; Conclusions: NTS offers rapid, highly sensitive detection of PTB in patients with low bacillary burden. Applying an optimal read-count cutoff and accounting for prior PTB history can enhance clinical utility.
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.