ReviewClinical and translational allergy2017
Comparison of atopy patch testing to skin prick testing for diagnosing mite-induced atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Clinical and translational allergy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Allergens in Atopic Dermatitis.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2025Review
- From skin testing to molecular diagnostics: the precision leap in dust mite allergy diagnosis and clinical translation challenges.Frontiers in allergy · 2025Review
- The Diagnostic Value of Delayed-Type Reactions to Perennial Aeroallergens for Atopic Disease.Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drugArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtopic dermatitis (AD) can occur after contact with aeroallergens like house dust mites, pollen, and animal dander. Despite its controversial diagnostic value, the atopy patch test (APT) has been used as an important tool in the diagnosis of AD caused by house dust mites. Here, we present a meta-analysis comparing APT to the common skin prick test (SPT) in the diagnosis of mite-induced AD.
methodsA structured search was performed using online databases and bibliographies published as of April 30, 2017. All studies evaluating the accuracy of APT and SPT in the diagnosis of mite-induced atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome were selected, appraised, and data was extracted.
resultsTen studies were identified for inclusion in our analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratios for APT were 0.54 (95% CI 0.42-0.66), 0.72 (95% CI 0.56-0.85), 1.97 (95% CI 1.20-3.23), 0.63 (95% CI 0.48-0.83), and 3.12 (95% CI 1.53-6.39). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.65 (95% CI 0.61-0.69).
conclusionsOur analysis indicates that APT is a useful tool in the screening of mite-induced AD, although this conclusion must be interpreted cautiously due to high heterogeneity among the included studies.
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.