ArticleBMC microbiology2026
A novel serum-based medium for drug susceptibility testing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
Article in BMC microbiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSheep serum agar (SSA) is a new serum-based medium developed as an alternative to Middlebrook 7H10 agar for the isolation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from clinical samples and for use in antimicrobial susceptibility testing. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of SSA in primary anti-tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing.
methodsA total of 107 M. tuberculosis isolates with different susceptibility profiles were tested simultaneously against primary anti-tuberculosis agents on SSA and Middlebrook 7H10 agar using the proportion method. The findings were compared with those obtained using the BACTEC MGIT 960 (M960) method.
resultsThe agreement between the M960 and 7H10 agar proportion method was determined as 93.45% for isoniazid (INH) and ethambutol (EMB), 96.26% for rifampicin (RIF), and 79.43% for streptomycin (STR), respectively. The agreement between the M960 and SSA proportion method was determined as 95.32% for INH, 97.19% for RIF, 92.52% for STR, and 86.91% for EMB, respectively. The agreement between the 7H10 agar proportion method and the SSA proportion method was determined as 98.13% for INH, 99.06% for RIF, 86.91% for STR, and 93.45% for EMB, respectively.
conclusionsSSA medium was more effective at detecting INH, RIF and STR resistance than 7H10 agar. The results demonstrate the potential of SSA as an alternative medium to 7H10 agar. Further research is needed to confirm its reliability and evaluate its performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.