Calligaro 2015
| Study characteristics | |||
| Patient sampling | Cross‐sectional design, consecutive enrolment, prospective data collection | ||
| Patient characteristics and setting | Presenting signs and symptoms: presumed pulmonary TB (based on suggestive pulmonary infiltrates, a history of constitutional symptoms preceding the ICU admission, or people known or suspected to be infected with HIV, irrespective of the reason for admission to the ICU) Age: 18 years and older, median 38 (IQR 28 to 51) Sex, female: 40% HIV infection: 27 % History of TB: yes, % not reported Sample size: 91 Clinical setting: inpatient Laboratory level: central Country: South Africa World Bank Income Classification: middle income High TB burden country: yes High MDR‐TB burden country: yes High TB/HIV burden country: yes Prevalence of TB cases in the study: 12.1% |
||
| Index tests | Index: Xpert MTB/RIF | ||
| Target condition and reference standard(s) | Target condition: pulmonary TB Reference standard for pulmonary TB: MGIT 960 Target condition: rifampicin resistance Reference standard for rifampicin resistance: MGIT 960 |
||
| Flow and timing | |||
| Comparative | |||
| Notes | |||
| Methodological quality | |||
| Item | Authors' judgement | Risk of bias | Applicability concerns |
| DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection | |||
| Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? | Yes | ||
| Was a case‐control design avoided? | Yes | ||
| Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? | Yes | ||
| Low | High | ||
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test Xpert MTB/RIF | |||
| Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | Yes | ||
| If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | Yes | ||
| Low | Low | ||
| DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard | |||
| Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? | Yes | ||
| Were the reference standard results for TB detection interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index test? | Yes | ||
| Were the reference standard results for rifampicin resistance detection interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index test? | Yes | ||
| Low | Low | ||
| DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing | |||
| Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? | Yes | ||
| Did all patients receive the same reference standard? | Yes | ||
| Were all patients included in the analysis? | Yes | ||
| Low | |||