
pmid: 15786893
handle: 11295/64842
City Council Chest Clinic, Nairobi, Kenya.To determine to what extent the performance of smear microscopy is responsible for sex differences in notification rates.Three sputum samples from TB suspects were subjected to smear microscopy with Ziehl-Neelsen (ZN) and auramine (FM) staining. Lowenstein-Jensen culture was used as the gold standard.Of 998 suspects, 600 (60%) were men and 398 (40%) women. The odds of detecting culture-positive patients with ZN was lower for women (OR 0.67). By examining the first spot specimen, ZN detected 35% of culture-positive males and 26% of culture-positive females. These proportions increased to respectively 63% and 53% when examining three specimens, and to 79% and 74% when using FM. The sex difference reduced and became non-significant (P = 0.19) when adjusted for HIV; however, the numbers involved for HIV stratification were low.The performance of a diagnostic tool contributes to sex differences in notification rates and influences male/female ratios. Women were less likely to be diagnosed (P = 0.08), and when ZN was used they were less likely to be labelled as smear-positive TB (P < 0.01). The application of more sensitive diagnostic tools such as FM is to the advantage of women.
Adult, Male, Bacteriological Techniques, Microscopy, Adolescent, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Sputum, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sex Factors, Humans, Regression Analysis, Female, Tuberculosis, Pulmonary, Aged
Adult, Male, Bacteriological Techniques, Microscopy, Adolescent, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Sputum, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sex Factors, Humans, Regression Analysis, Female, Tuberculosis, Pulmonary, Aged
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 24 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
