ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2007
Diagnostic accuracy of a rapid fecal test to confirm H pylori eradication after therapy: prospective comparison with a laboratory stool test.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a lateral flow device for rapid simultaneous multiple detections of some common bacterial causes of bovine mastitis.Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the clinical performances of rapid stool test (ImmunoCard STAT HpSA, Meridian Diagnostic Inc.) in the evaluation of eradication therapy of H pylori and to compare it with a well-known and validated laboratory stool test (Amplified IDEA Hp StAR, Dako).
methodsStool samples of 122 patients were evaluated after eradication therapy of H pylori. H pylori status was assessed by 13C-urea breath test (UBT). Stool specimens were tested using either the rapid immunoassay kit or the laboratory immunoassay kit.
resultsForty-three patients were infected and 79 non-infected. Sensitivity and specificity of ImmunoCard STAT and Hp StAR were 58.14% and 76.4%, and 97.47% and 98.73%, respectively (P > 0.05). Overall agreement between the two tests was 92.6% (113 of 122 cases).
conclusionImmunoCard STAT seems to have rather low performances, and it cannot be regarded as a reliable tool in the post-treatment setting. Also Hp StAR cannot be recommended to confirm H pylori eradication after treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.