MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2472138188 · doi:10.1183/13993003.00543-2016

Development, roll-out and impact of Xpert MTB/RIF for tuberculosis: what lessons have we learnt and how can we do better?

2016· review· en· W2472138188 on OpenAlexaff
Heidi Albert, Ruvandhi R. Nathavitharana, Chris Isaacs, Madhukar Pai, Claudia M. Denkinger, Catharina Boehme

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTuberculosisQuality assuranceProduct (mathematics)Private sectorScale (ratio)Health careOperations managementEconomic growthEngineeringPathologyExternal quality assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global roll-out of Xpert MTB/RIF (Cepheid Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has changed the diagnostic landscape of tuberculosis (TB). More than 16 million tests have been performed in 122 countries since 2011, and detection of multidrug-resistant TB has increased three- to eight-fold compared to conventional testing. The roll-out has galvanised stakeholders, from donors to civil society, and paved the way for universal drug susceptibility testing. It has attracted new product developers to TB, resulting in a robust molecular diagnostics pipeline. However, the roll-out has also highlighted gaps that have constrained scale-up and limited impact on patient outcomes. The roll-out has been hampered by high costs for under-funded programmes, unavailability of a complete solution package (notably comprehensive training, quality assurance, implementation plans, inadequate service and maintenance support) and lack of impact assessment. Insufficient focus has been afforded to effective linkage to care of diagnosed patients, and clinical impact has been blunted by weak health systems. In many countries the private sector plays a dominant role in TB control, yet this sector has limited access to subsidised pricing. In light of these lessons, we advocate for a comprehensive diagnostics implementation approach, including increased engagement of in-country stakeholders for product launch and roll-out, broader systems strengthening in preparation for new technologies, as well as quality impact data from programmatic settings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0160.026
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0120.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations300
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207