ArticleBMC microbiology2026
Diagnostic value of nanopore-based targeted sequencing technology for subclinical 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSubclinical Tuberculosis (TB), with low bacterial loads and non-specific symptoms, is difficult to diagnose and promotes transmission. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of nanopore-based targeted sequencing (NTS) for subclinical TB in comparison with Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) culture and GeneXpert MTB/RIF (Xpert MTB/RIF) assays.
methodsThis retrospective research included 103 subclinical TB suspects. We tested sputum, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, or pleural effusion from each patient using NTS, MGIT culture, and Xpert. Diagnostic performance was assessed using a composite standard.
resultsNTS exhibited higher sensitivity (90.9%) than MGIT culture (40.9%) and Xpert MTB/RIF (50.0%). It had a larger area under the curve (AUC) of 0.923 than Xpert (0.731) and MGIT culture (0.667), as well as an impressive negative predictive value (97.4%) and accuracy (93.2%).
conclusionNTS efficiently identifies subclinical TB cases with low bacterial burdens using the composite diagnostic criteria, outperforming conventional methods. It could detect TB early, closing the gap in TB control.
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.