Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2026
Diagnostic performance of a centrifugation-free stool processing kit in conjunction with Xpert
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03734172 (Rapid and Accurate Diagnosis of Paediatric), which is not on this 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.
Rapid and Accurate Diagnosis of Paediatric (RaPaed) TB - An AIDA (Assessment of Innovative Diagnostics and Algorithms for Early and Sensitive Detection of Acute TB) Platform Study
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
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDiagnosing paediatric tuberculosis (TB) remains challenging. Currently available diagnostic tests have limited accuracy, and most sampling methods are invasive. In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) endorsed the use of molecular WHO-recommended rapid diagnostic tests (mWRDs) with stool as an initial diagnostic tool for paediatric TB. In this study, we evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of stool samples processed with the Stool Processing Kit (SPK), one of three centrifugation-free methods available at the time.
methodsWe conducted a multi-centre prospective diagnostic validation study in South Africa, Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, and India. Children (< 15 years) under investigation for TB provided at least two (induced) sputum samples at enrolment, one stool sample, and one nasopharyngeal aspirate (NPA) if aged < 5 years and a chest x-ray. TB testing included Xpert
resultsOut of 5313 children screened, 975 were enrolled, and data from 817 children recruited between January 2019 and June 2021 were analysed. The overall microbiological confirmation rate was 203/817 (24.9%), and an additional 358/817 (43.8%) were classified as unconfirmed TB and 256/817 (31.3%) were classified as unlikely TB. The median age was 5.3 years (IQR: 2.0-9.2), and 390/817 (47.7%) of participants were under the age of five. 134/817 (16.4%) of children were living with HIV, and 88/817 (10.8%) had severe acute malnutrition (SAM). The overall sensitivity and specificity of SPK/Ultra against a Strict Reference Standard (SRS) were 33.8% (95% CI: 27.6-40.6) and 86.8% (95% CI: 80.5-91.3), respectively. Among children under one year of age and those with SAM, sensitivity was 43.3% (95% CI: 27.4-60.8) and 41.4% (95% CI: 25.5-59.3), respectively, with specificity reaching 100% in young children and 85% (95% CI: 64.0-94.8) in children with SAM. Classic TB symptoms and chest X-ray abnormalities at baseline were associated with increased likelihood of SPK/Ultra positivity.
conclusionsThis is one of the largest studies to evaluate stool as an alternative specimen for diagnosing paediatric TB. Although the WHO's target product profile was not fully met, stool testing with SPK/Ultra represents a viable alternative to invasive sampling methods, especially in subgroups of interest.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03734172, June 22, 2018.
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.