Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29119118›Full record

SynthesisJournal of diabetes research2017

Diagnostic Accuracy of Monofilament Tests for Detecting Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Fengyi Wang, Jiaqi Zhang, Jiadan Yu, Shaxin Liu, Rengang Zhang, Xichao Ma, Yonghong Yang, Pu Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of diabetes research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2022
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Fengyi WangRehabilitation Medicine Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8137-1975
Jiaqi ZhangDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong.
Jiadan YuWest China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Shaxin LiuRehabilitation Medicine Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Rengang ZhangRehabilitation Medicine Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xichao MaRehabilitation Medicine Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yonghong YangRehabilitation Medicine Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3547-4858
Pu WangRui Jin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5810-000X
Sichuan University · CNHong Kong Polytechnic University · HKShanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of monofilament tests for detecting diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

methodsWe searched EMBASE (OvidSP), MEDLINE (OvidSP), the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify diagnostic accuracy trials of monofilament tests for detecting diabetic peripheral neuropathy. We used a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics (HSROC) model to conduct the meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of monofilament tests for detecting diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

resultsA total of 19 comparative trials met the inclusion criteria and were part of the qualitative synthesis. Eight trials using nerve conduction studies as the reference standard were selected for the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of monofilament tests for detecting diabetic peripheral neuropathy were 0.53 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.74) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.94), respectively. The pooled positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 4.56 (95% CI 2.93 to 7.10) and 0.53 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.81), respectively.

conclusionsOur review indicated that monofilament tests had limited sensitivity for screening diabetic peripheral neuropathy. The clinical use of the monofilament test in the evaluation of diabetic peripheral neuropathy cannot be encouraged based on currently available evidence.

Indexed as

Diabetic NeuropathiesHumansNeural ConductionPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesPhysical ExaminationSensitivity and SpecificityTouch Perception

Identifiers

PMID29119118
PMCPMC5651135
OpenAlexW2760835909

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.