SynthesisPloS one2015
Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests for hepatitis C virus infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Screening for Migrants in the EU/EEA: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of serological diagnosis of hepatitis C and B using dried blood spot samples (DBS): two systematic reviews and meta-analyses.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of tests to detect Hepatitis C antibody: a meta-analysis and review of the literature.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Pooled it
- Hepatitis C virus prevalence and genotype distribution in Pakistan: Comprehensive review of recent data.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Pooled it
- Trial
- Evaluating performance of the Bioline™ HCV point-of-care test in Ghana.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Alternative Approaches to Hepatitis C Diagnosis and Treatment Initiation for Treatment-naive People Who Inject Drugs in Australia: A Model-based Economic Evaluation.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Micro-elimination initiative for hepatitis C screening: insight into gender gaps and undiagnosed individuals.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Reaching Syrian migrants through Dutch municipal registries for hepatitis B and C point-of-care testing.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- A Case Series and Literature Review of Alveolar Echinococcosis in Kashmir, India: An Emerging Endemic Zone forLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Rapid point-of-care testing for hepatitis C - assessment of feasibility, knowledge of participants and outcomes.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2024Article
- Point-of-Care Testing for Hepatitis Viruses: A Growing Need.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A descriptive study of hepatitis C in people who inject drugs.The Indian journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Assessing feasibility of a modified same-day test-and-treat model for hepatitis C among rural people who inject drugs.Harm reduction journal · 2023Article
- Quality Assurance for Hepatitis C Virus Point-of-Care Diagnostics in Sub-Saharan Africa.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The performance of hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody point-of-care tests on oral fluid or whole blood and dried blood spot testing for HCV serology and viral load among individuals at higher risk for HCV in South Africa.Health science reports · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of facility-based screening and treatment of hepatitis C in Punjab state of India.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Efficacy and safety of Qishen granules for chronic heart failure: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2020Article
- Impact of routine opt-out HIV/HCV screening on testing uptake at a syringe services program: An interrupted time series analysis.The International journal on drug policy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care tests provide a plausible diagnostic strategy for hepatitis C infection in economically impoverished areas. However, their utility depends upon the overall performance of individual tests.
methodsA literature search was conducted using the metasearch engine Mettā, a query interface for retrieving articles from five leading medical databases. Studies were included if they employed point-of-care tests to detect antibodies of hepatitis C virus and compared the results with reference tests. Two reviewers performed a quality assessment of the studies and extracted data for estimating test accuracy.
findingsThirty studies that had evaluated 30 tests fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The overall pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood-ratio, negative likelihood-ratio and diagnostic odds ratio for all tests were 97.4% (95% CI: 95.9-98.4), 99.5% (99.2-99.7), 80.17 (55.35-116.14), 0.03 (0.02-0.04), and 3032.85 (1595.86-5763.78), respectively. This suggested a high pooled accuracy for all studies. We found substantial heterogeneity between studies, but none of the subgroups investigated could account for the heterogeneity. Genotype diversity of HCV had no or minimal influence on test performance. Of the seven tests evaluated in the meta-regression model, OraQuick had the highest test sensitivity and specificity and showed better performance than a third generation enzyme immunoassay in seroconversion panels. The next highest test sensitivities and specificities were from TriDot and SDBioline, followed by Genedia and Chembio. The Spot and Multiplo tests produced poor test sensitivities but high test specificities. Nine of the remaining 23 tests produced poor test sensitivities and specificities and/or showed poor performances in seroconversion panels, while 14 tests had high test performances with diagnostic odds ratios ranging from 590.70 to 28822.20.
conclusionsPerformances varied widely among individual point-of-care tests for diagnosis of hepatitis C virus infection. Physicians should consider this while using specific tests in clinical practice.
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.