Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23350004›Full record

SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2013

The laboratory diagnosis and follow up of strongyloidiasis: a systematic review.

Ana Requena-Méndez, Peter Chiodini, Zeno Bisoffi, Dora Buonfrate, Eduardo Gotuzzo, José Muñoz

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 189 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
189citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
23.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

189 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 390 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Morbidity Associated with ChronicThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2019
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Helminthologia · 2026
    Article

129 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Ana Requena-MéndezBarcelona Centre for International Health Research (CRESIB, Hospital Clínic-Universitat de Barcelona), Barcelona, Spain. ana.requena@cresib.cat
Peter Chiodini
Zeno Bisoffi
Dora Buonfrate
Eduardo Gotuzzo
José Muñoz
Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria · ITBarcelona Centre for International Affairs · ESLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia · PEUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStrongyloidiasis is frequently under diagnosed since many infections remain asymptomatic and conventional diagnostic tests based on parasitological examination are not sufficiently sensitive. Serology is useful but is still only available in reference laboratories. The need for improved diagnostic tests in terms of sensitivity and specificity is clear, particularly in immunocompromised patients or candidates to immunosuppressive treatments. This review aims to evaluate both conventional and novel techniques for the diagnosis of strongyloidiasis as well as available cure markers for this parasitic infection. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsThe search strategy was based on the data-base sources MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Register for systematic review, EmBase, Global Health and LILACS and was limited in the search string to articles published from 1960 to August 2012 and to English, Spanish, French, Portuguese and German languages. Case reports, case series and animal studies were excluded. 2003 potentially relevant citations were selected for retrieval, of which 1649 were selected for review of the abstract. 143 were eligible for final inclusion.

conclusionsSensitivity of microscopic-based techniques is not good enough, particularly in chronic infections. Furthermore, techniques such as Baermann or agar plate culture are cumbersome and time-consuming and several specimens should be collected on different days to improve the detection rate. Serology is a useful tool but it might overestimate the prevalence of disease due to cross-reactivity with other nematode infections and its difficulty distinguishing recent from past (and cured) infections. To evaluate treatment efficacy is still a major concern because direct parasitological methods might overestimate it and the serology has not yet been well evaluated; even if there is a decline in antibody titres after treatment, it is slow and it needs to be done at 6 to 12 months after treatment which can cause a substantial loss to follow-up in a clinical trial.

Indexed as

AnimalsClinical Laboratory TechniquesDrug MonitoringHumansParasitologySensitivity and SpecificityStrongyloidesStrongyloidiasis

Identifiers

PMID23350004
PMCPMC3547839
OpenAlexW2062529028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.