2022
DOI: 10.1016/s2352-3018(22)00002-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tuberculosis screening among HIV-positive inpatients: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
13
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
13
1
Order By: Relevance
“… 2 However, both the sensitivity and specificity by our study were comparable to those reported by a recent meta-analysis among HIV-positive inpatients. 26 Our study reported a slightly higher specificity than that reported by the meta-analysis when W4SS and CRP were used in parallel. The overall sensitivity and specificity of W4SS and six-symptom screening were similar to those by a previous study conducted in the Zambian setting 27 and by WHO.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 58%
“… 2 However, both the sensitivity and specificity by our study were comparable to those reported by a recent meta-analysis among HIV-positive inpatients. 26 Our study reported a slightly higher specificity than that reported by the meta-analysis when W4SS and CRP were used in parallel. The overall sensitivity and specificity of W4SS and six-symptom screening were similar to those by a previous study conducted in the Zambian setting 27 and by WHO.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 58%
“…FujiLAM is expected to produce fewer cross-reactions with non-tuberculous mycobacteria than AlereLAM due to highly specific antibodies. 18 , 20 , 27 We found most false positive FujiLAM results were weakly positive and occurred in specific lot numbers. One hypothesis is that some false positive results could also be due to cross-reactions with other pathogens producing weakly positive results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…Disagreements between authors were resolved by discussion. We used similar methods to our recent systematic review that contributed to the 2021 WHO tuberculosis screening guidelines; 13,16,19 LF-LAM analyses were not pre-specified in our protocol. Our initial systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020155895).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The W4SS, which was developed among ambulatory PLHIV, 15 has low specificity for diagnosis of tuberculosis in inpatients. 16 CD4 cell count may also have low specificity, since inpatients typically have advanced immunodeficiency. It is also often not rapidly available.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%