SynthesisMemorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz2015
Accuracy of mucocutaneous leishmaniasis diagnosis using polymerase chain reaction: systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- "High specificity of PCR in diagnosing mucocutaneous leshminiasis: a systematic review and meta analysis".BMC infectious diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical criteria for Mucosal Leishmaniasis diagnosis in rural South America: A systematic literature review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Interventions for American cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Persistence ofBiomedicines · 2025Article
- Molecular Identification and Drug Susceptibility ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Shared challenges to the control of complex intracellular neglected pathogens.Frontiers in public health · 2024Review
- Accuracy of serological tests in diagnosing mucosal leishmaniasis.Parasitology research · 2023Article
- Laboratory diagnostics for human Leishmania infections: a polymerase chain reaction-focussed review of detection and identification methods.Parasites & vectors · 2022Review
- The accuracy of the Montenegro skin test for leishmaniasis in PCR-negative patients.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2020Article
- The paradox of tegumentary leishmaniasis diagnosis: How the need for accurate and modern techniques is being addressed in low income areas.EBioMedicine · 2018Article
- Prevalence of and Factors Associated with Negative Microscopic Diagnosis of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in Rural Peru.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2018Article
- Field Validation of SYBR Green- and TaqMan-Based Real-Time PCR Using Biopsy and Swab Samples To Diagnose American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis in an Area Where Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis Is Endemic.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2017Article
- Sensitivity of different DNA extraction methods and PCR to detect resistance in patients with leprosy stratified by the bacilloscopic index.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesArticle
- Final diagnosis of 86 cases included in differential diagnosis of American tegumentary leishmaniasis in a Brazilian sample: a retrospective cross-sectional study.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis of mucocutaneous leishmaniasis (MCL) is hampered by the absence of a gold standard. An accurate diagnosis is essential because of the high toxicity of the medications for the disease. This study aimed to assess the ability of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to identify MCL and to compare these results with clinical research recently published by the authors. A systematic literature review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement was performed using comprehensive search criteria and communication with the authors. A meta-analysis considering the estimates of the univariate and bivariate models was performed. Specificity near 100% was common among the papers. The primary reason for accuracy differences was sensitivity. The meta-analysis, which was only possible for PCR samples of lesion fragments, revealed a sensitivity of 71% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.59; 0.81] and a specificity of 93% (95% CI = 0.83; 0.98) in the bivariate model. The search for measures that could increase the sensitivity of PCR should be encouraged. The quality of the collected material and the optimisation of the amplification of genetic material should be prioritised.
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.