SynthesisParasitology research2015
Meta-analysis of the diagnostic efficiency of the questionnaires screening for schistosomiasis.
Synthesis in Parasitology research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Screening and Treatment Approaches for Schistosomiasis and Strongyloidiasis in Newly-Arrived Migrants from Endemic Countries in the EU/EEA: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Schistosomiasis amongst adolescent boys in non-lakeshore southern Malawi: Investigating local risk-factors within a nested community-based cross-sectional survey.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Praziquantel and Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Hepatic Schistosomiasis: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Schistosomiasis is the second widespread tropical disease that affects the health of over 240 million people of 78 countries. Questionnaires have been commonly used to diagnose schistosomiasis, while no meta-analysis of their efficacy had been reported previously. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess their diagnostic accuracy of schistosomiasis. Studies published prior to December 1, 2014, that had used questionnaires as a diagnostic tool were searched in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. A total of 32 studies with 72,812 cases were identified for the meta-analysis. The best diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was obtained from Schistosoma haematobium (67.68, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 31.48 to 145.54), followed by Schistosoma japonicum (11.74, 95 % CI = 4.59 to 30.05) then Schistosoma mansoni (2.98, 95 % CI = 1.95 to 4.54). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were respectively 0.82, 0.88, and 0.46, and 0.59, 0.86, and 0.81 for S. japonicum, S. haematobium, and S. mansoni. The multivariable subgroup analyses showed that the questionnaires which had been pretested and standardized had better diagnostic performance. The result suggested that questionnaires can be used to diagnose schistosomiasis with moderate sensitivity and specificity and the questionnaires for diagnosing S. haematobium performed best.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26122990What 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.