ArticleBMJ open2026
Feasibility and acceptability of pooled sputum testing for tuberculosis: a multicountry qualitative study of the Start4All project.
Article in BMJ 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTuberculosis (TB) remains underdiagnosed in many high-burden countries due to high costs and limited availability of rapid molecular tests. Globally, only half of people with TB receive a molecular test as their initial diagnostic test. Pooled testing combines sputum samples from multiple individuals into a single molecular assay, offering cost savings by optimising existing resources, particularly in resource-constrained health systems. Although pooled sputum testing has now been recommended by the World Health Organization in 2026, evidence on real-world feasibility and acceptability for people with TB and healthcare providers remains limited. This study explored multisectoral stakeholder perspectives on the feasibility and acceptability of pooled sputum testing for TB.
designMulticountry qualitative study using key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Data were analysed using a framework approach guided by established feasibility and acceptability models.
settingFacility and community settings across seven high-TB-burden countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Cameroon, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Viet Nam.
participantsThirty-eight key informant interviews and 18 focus group discussions were conducted with National TB Programme (NTP) representatives, laboratory technicians, people with TB and international experts.
resultsPooled testing was considered feasible and acceptable in facility and community settings with greater confidence in countries with prior implementation experience. Feasibility depended on alignment with diagnostic algorithms and laboratory workflows, biosafety, training and clear standard operating procedures.Acceptability operated at two levels: early NTP engagement with healthcare providers to secure professional buy-in and clear communication between healthcare providers and people undergoing testing to support understanding.
conclusionsPooled testing was considered feasible and acceptable in settings with robust laboratory systems and routine practices. Readiness varied across countries, with some suitable for rapid implementation and scale-up while others required system strengthening. In settings perceived as having suitable infrastructure and readiness, pooled testing was viewed as a pragmatic strategy to optimise molecular TB testing.
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.