SynthesisBMJ open2017
Accuracy of testing for anti-
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- VTH BRAZILIAN CONSENSUS CONFERENCE ON HELICOBACTER PYLORI INFECTION.Arquivos de gastroenterologia · 2026Article
- Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Urine of Individuals Vaccinated with Janssen AD26.COV2.S COVID-19 Vaccine.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Eradication efficacy of high-dose amoxicillin and proton pump inhibitor compared with quadruple therapy contained bismuth in the treatment ofJournal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in urine samples: A noninvasive and sensitive way to assay COVID-19 immune conversion.Science advances · 2022Article
- Pathogenesis and clinical management ofWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Diet and rosacea: the role of dietary change in the management of rosacea.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2017Review
- Diagnostic approach toAnnals of gastroenterologyReview
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
objectivesThis meta-analysis aims to systematically measure the potential diagnostic value of anti-
designThe random effect model was used to analyse the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative LR (NLR), diagnostic OR (DOR), together with the summary receiver operator characteristic curve.
settingLiterature searches of databases including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang databases were performed to retrieve studies evaluating the diagnostic value of urine IgG antibody for PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Twenty-three studies with 4963 subjects were included in the current meta-analysis.
resultsThe pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and area under the curve (AUC) were 0.83 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.85), 0.89 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.90), 8.81 (95% CI 6.37 to 12.2), 0.13 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.2), 73 (95% CI 46.45 to 114.74) and 0.9551, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that diagnostic accuracy of the urine IgG assay was no different in age, region, study population and assay method.
conclusionsAnti-
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.