Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28747410›Full record

SynthesisSexually transmitted infections2017

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the performance and operational characteristics of dual point-of-care tests for HIV and syphilis.

Harriet D Gliddon, Rosanna W Peeling, Mary L Kamb, Igor Toskin, Teodora E Wi, Melanie M Taylor

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sexually transmitted infections, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Clinical Updates in Sexually Transmitted Infections, 2024.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Harriet D GliddonLondon Centre for Nanotechnology, University College London, London, UK.
Rosanna W PeelingDepartment of Clinical Research, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Mary L KambDivision of STD Prevention, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Igor ToskinDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Teodora E WiDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Melanie M TaylorDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of syphilis and HIV continue to be important yet preventable causes of perinatal and infant morbidity and mortality.

objectivesTo systematically review, critically appraise and perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the operational characteristics of dual rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for HIV/syphilis and evaluate whether they are cost effective, acceptable and easy to use.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched seven electronic bibliographic databases from 2012 to December 2016 with no language restrictions. Search keywords included HIV, syphilis and diagnosis. REVIEW

methodsWe included studies that evaluated the operational characteristics of dual HIV/syphilis RDTs. Outcomes included diagnostic test accuracy, cost effectiveness, ease of use and interpretation and acceptability. All studies were assessed against quality criteria and assessed for risk of bias.

resultsOf 1914 identified papers, 18 were included for the meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy for HIV and syphilis. All diagnostic accuracy evaluation studies showed a very high sensitivity and specificity for HIV and a lower, yet adequate, sensitivity and specificity for syphilis, with some variation among types of test. Dual screening for HIV and syphilis was more cost effective than single rapid tests for HIV and syphilis and prevented more adverse pregnancy outcomes. Qualitative data suggested dual RDTs were highly acceptable to clients, who cited time to result, cost and the requirement of a single finger prick as important characteristics of dual RDTs.

conclusionThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis can be used by policy-makers and national programme managers who are considering implementing dual RDTs for HIV and syphilis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016049168.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInfectious Disease Transmission, VerticalPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousPregnancy OutcomePrenatal DiagnosisSensitivity and SpecificitySyphilisSyphilis, CongenitaldiagnosisHIVsyphilissystematic reviewstesting

Identifiers

PMID28747410
PMCPMC6754342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.