MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403377216 · doi:10.7759/cureus.71402

Comparative Evaluation of GeneXpert With Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) Stain in Samples of Suspected Tuberculosis Cases at a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in Central India

2024· article· en· W4403377216 on OpenAlexaff
Jyoti Gupta, Priyanka Joshi, Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Vikas Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneXpert MTB/RIFMedicineZiehl–Neelsen stainTertiary careTuberculosisStainMycobacterium tuberculosisPathologyInternal medicineStainingAcid-fastSputum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Tuberculosis (TB) remains a significant public health challenge, particularly in developing countries, where delayed diagnosis contributes to ongoing transmission. Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) smear microscopy, commonly used for TB diagnosis, has limitations in sensitivity, especially in cases of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (ETB). The GeneXpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)/rifampicin (RIF) assay, a molecular diagnostic tool, offers rapid and accurate detection of MTB and RIF resistance. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of GeneXpert MTB/RIF with ZN staining in detecting pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) and ETB. Methods A prospective study was conducted over two years (April 2022 to April 2024) at a tertiary care teaching hospital in India. A total of 319 clinical samples from patients with suspected PTB and ETB were analyzed. Samples underwent ZN staining and GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated using mycobacterial culture as the gold standard. The chi-square test was employed to compare diagnostic accuracy, with a p-value of <0.05 considered statistically significant. Results Of the 319 samples, ZN staining was positive in 18.2% of cases, while GeneXpert was positive in 21.6%. GeneXpert demonstrated a perfect sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 98.81%, compared to ZN staining’s sensitivity of 84.85% and specificity of 99.21%. GeneXpert showed superior performance in detecting TB in both pulmonary and extrapulmonary samples, with a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). Additionally, GeneXpert identified six cases of RIF resistance. Conclusion The GeneXpert MTB/RIF assay outperforms ZN staining in diagnosing TB, offering higher sensitivity and comparable specificity. Its ability to detect RIF resistance adds significant clinical value. Despite its cost, the integration of GeneXpert into routine diagnostic workflows, particularly in high TB prevalence areas, is recommended to enhance early detection and treatment, thereby reducing TB transmission.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207