ArticleJournal of postgraduate medicine2026
Diagnostic utility of the urine lipoarabinomannan assay for tuberculosis screening in patients with diabetes mellitus.
Article in Journal of postgraduate medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractIndividuals with diabetes have a two- to four-fold increased risk of active tuberculosis (TB), and up to 30% of people with TB are more likely to have diabetes mellitus (DM). Commonly used methods for diagnosing TB include sputum smear microscopy, liquid culture of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis) with drug susceptibility testing, tuberculin testing, interferon-γ release assay, lipoarabinomannan (LAM) lateral flow assay, and Xpert MTB/RIF. In this context, this study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the urine LAM assay in diagnosing TB in individuals with diabetes, as well as the agreement between urine LAM and sputum microscopy and cartridge-based nucleic acid amplification test (CBNAAT). A total of 61 patients with diabetes were included; two sputum samples were collected, one for microscopy and another for CBNAAT, and a urine sample was collected for the LAM assay. Of the 61 patients with diabetes, 47 (77%) were male and 14 (23%) were female. The mean age of the study population was 51.89 years. Of the 61 patients, 35 (57%) were positive by sputum microscopy, 39 (64%) by CBNAAT, and 36 (59%) by urine LAM assay. All patients who tested negative by CBNAAT also tested negative using the urine LAM assay and sputum microscopy, demonstrating complete consistency in results between these diagnostic methods for this subgroup. Hence, the urine LAM assay can be used as a screening test in patients who have difficulty providing sputum samples, as well as in patients with human immunodeficiency virus and pediatric patients.
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.