Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Patient recruitment and assignment of patients to ‘confirmed’, ‘probable’, or ‘TB unlikely’ groups.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of patients.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Clinical features of 96 pediatric TB suspects.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Sensitivity of MODS, smear and MGIT against clinical gold standard.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Figure 2.

MODS positive in relation to Smear and MGIT, by patient.

* This patient was deemed a false positive due to H37Rv (the positive control strain) identification by spoligotyping.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Detection rates of Smear, MGIT and MODS in relation to TB treatment.

P values for comparison of detection rates between MODS and MGIT. * TAT: Turn around time.

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Time-dependent sensitivity of smear, MODS and MGIT.

In the 73 samples which were both MGIT and MODS positive, the time dependent sensitivities of MODS were higher than MGIT on both day 7 (P<0.001) and day 14 (P = 0.04).

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Figure 5.

Time to MGIT positive and MODS positive in relation to smear grade.

Filled dots are samples positive by either MGIT or MODS, lines are scatter plot smoothers. Both MGIT and MODS had a negative Spearman rank correlation with smear grade (P<0.001).

More »

Figure 5 Expand

Figure 6.

Position of contamination observed in MODS Plates.

C. Positive control (H37Rv), S. Sample, F. Contaminated with fungi, Rv. Contaminated with H37Rv, Rv(4). Four experiments contaminated with H37Rv at this position.

More »

Figure 6 Expand