| Title |
Assessment of sputum smear-positive but culture-negative results among newly diagnosed pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Tanzania
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of General Medicine, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijgm.s137469 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicholaus Peter Mnyambwa, Esther S Ngadaya, Godfather Kimaro, Dong-Jin Kim, Rudovick Kazwala, Pammla Petrucka, Sayoki G Mfinanga |
| Abstract |
Diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) in technology-limited countries is widely achieved by smear microscopy, which has limited sensitivity and specificity. The frequency and clinical implication of smear-positive but culture-negative among presumptive TB patients remains unclear. A cross-sectional substudy was conducted which aimed to identify the proportion of nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) infections among 94 "smear-positive culture-negative" patients diagnosed between January 2013 and June 2016 in selected health facilities in Tanzania. Out of 94 sputa, 25 (26.60%) were GeneXpert® mycobacteria TB positive and 11/94 (11.70%) repeat-culture positive; 5 were Capilia TB-Neo positive and confirmed by GenoType MTBC to be Mycobacterium tuberculosis/Mycobacterium canettii. The remaining 6 Capilia TB-Neo negative samples were genotyped by GenoType® CM/AS, identifying 3 (3.19%) NTM, 2 Gram positive bacteria, and 1 isolate testing negative, together, making a total of 6/94 (6.38%) confirmed false smear-positives. Twenty-eight (29.79%) were confirmed TB cases, while 60 (63.83%) remained unconfirmed cases. Out of 6 (6.38%) patients who were HIV positive, 2 patients were possibly coinfected with mycobacteria. The isolation of NTM and other bacteria among smear-positive culture-negative samples and the presence of over two third of unconfirmed TB cases emphasize the need of both advanced differential TB diagnostic techniques and good clinical laboratory practices to avoid unnecessary administration of anti-TB drugs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Kenya | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Ghana | 1 | 17% |
| South Africa | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 16% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 28% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 9 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,470,302
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#282
of 1,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,281
of 314,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,461 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,062 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.