Cited by 20Tuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyInfectious Diseases and TuberculosisMycobacterium research and diagnosis

Xpert MTB/RIF test for detection of pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance

Sohn, Hojoon, Pai, Madhukar, Dendukuri, Nandini, Kloda, Lorie A, Boehme, Catharina C, Steingart, Karen R·2012·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Diagnostic test accuracy). The objectives are as follows: Primary objectives Review question A: To obtain summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF for the diagnosis of pulmonary TB, using solid or liquid culture as a reference standard. Purpose of index test: A.1 Xpert MTB/RIF as a replacement test for smear microscopy. A.2. Xpert MTB/RIF as an add‐on test after smear microscopy. Review question B: To obtain summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF for detection of rifampicin resistance, using solid or liquid culture as a reference standard (WHO 2008). Purpose of index test: B.1 Xpert MTB/RIF as a replacement test for WHO‐approved tests for detection of rifampicin resistance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd009593

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For detection of rifampicin resistance in extrapulmonary specimens, the sensitivity and specificity of Xpert Ultra and Xpert MTB/RIF were comparable to estimates in pulmonary specimens.

    “For detection of rifampicin resistance in extrapulmonary specimens, we found the sensitivity of Xpert Ultra (100%) and Xpert MTB/RIF (96.7%) and the specificity of Xpert Ultra (100%) and Xpert MTB/RIF (99.1%), to be comparable to estimates in pulmonary specimens: sensitivity (96%) and specificity (98%) (Horne 2019).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 58 · Cited by 20

Authors
Sohn, H., Pai, M., Dendukuri, N., Kloda, L. A., Boehme, C. C., & Steingart, K. R.
Affiliations
  • McGill University (CA)
  • FIND (CH)
  • University of Washington (US)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Published
2012-01-18
ISSN
1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062775631
Cited by
20
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
Type
reference entry
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Infectious Diseases and Tuberculosis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Mycobacterium research and diagnosis
Keywords
Xpert MTB/RIF, pulmonary tuberculosis, rifampicin resistance, diagnostic accuracy, smear microscopy, liquid culture, solid culture, tuberculosis diagnosis, molecular diagnosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review