Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25369170›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2014

Rapid antigen group A streptococcus test to diagnose pharyngitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Emily H Stewart, Brian Davis, B Lee Clemans-Taylor, Benjamin Littenberg, Carlos A Estrada, Robert M Centor

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Rapid detection of S. pyogenes and S. pneumoniae in pleural fluid for diagnosis of parapneumonic empyema.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 1 country.

Emily H StewartWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.
Brian DavisUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, United States of America.
B Lee Clemans-TaylorThe University of Alabama at Birmingham, Huntsville Campus, Huntsville, Alabama, United States of America.
Benjamin LittenbergUniversity of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, United States of America.
Carlos A EstradaUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America; Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Veterans Affairs Quality Scholar Program, Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America.
Robert M CentorThe University of Alabama at Birmingham, Huntsville Campus, Huntsville, Alabama, United States of America.
University of Alabama at Birmingham · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Alabama in Huntsville · USUniversity of Vermont · USWalter Reed National Military Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPharyngitis management guidelines include estimates of the test characteristics of rapid antigen streptococcus tests (RAST) using a non-systematic approach.

objectiveTo examine the sensitivity and specificity, and sources of variability, of RAST for diagnosing group A streptococcal (GAS) pharyngitis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Scopus, SciELO, CINAHL, guidelines, 2000-2012. STUDY SELECTION: Culture as reference standard, all languages. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study characteristics, quality. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Sensitivity, specificity.

resultsWe included 59 studies encompassing 55,766 patients. Forty three studies (18,464 patients) fulfilled the higher quality definition (at least 50 patients, prospective data collection, and no significant biases) and 16 (35,634 patients) did not. For the higher quality immunochromatographic methods in children (10,325 patients), heterogeneity was high for sensitivity (inconsistency [I(2)] 88%) and specificity (I(2) 86%). For enzyme immunoassay in children (342 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 86% (95% CI, 79-92%) and the pooled specificity was 92% (95% CI, 88-95%). For the higher quality immunochromatographic methods in the adult population (1,216 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 91% (95% CI, 87 to 94%) and the pooled specificity was 93% (95% CI, 92 to 95%); however, heterogeneity was modest for sensitivity (I(2) 61%) and specificity (I(2) 72%). For enzyme immunoassay in the adult population (333 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 86% (95% CI, 81-91%) and the pooled specificity was 97% (95% CI, 96 to 99%); however, heterogeneity was high for sensitivity and specificity (both, I(2) 88%).

conclusionsRAST immunochromatographic methods appear to be very sensitive and highly specific to diagnose group A streptococcal pharyngitis among adults but not in children. We could not identify sources of variability among higher quality studies. The present systematic review provides the best evidence for the wide range of sensitivity included in current guidelines.

Indexed as

Chromatography, AffinityHumansImmunoenzyme TechniquesPharyngitisSensitivity and SpecificityStreptococcal InfectionsStreptococcus pyogenes

Identifiers

PMID25369170
PMCPMC4219770
OpenAlexW2138352991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.