Accuracy of composite diagnostic standards for pneumococcal pneumonia in vaccine trials.

M Suzuki, S Katoh, R Miyahara, K Ariyoshi, K Morimoto

Abstract readEvaluation StudyReview

In one paragraph

Review in Epidemiology and infection, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

PCV13 Vaccination of Adults against Pneumococcal Disease: What We Have Learned from the Community-Acquired Pneumonia Immunization Trial in Adults (CAPiTA).Microorganisms · 2022
Review

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

5 authors.

M SuzukiDepartment of Clinical Medicine,Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki University,Nagasaki,Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8340-0880

S KatohDepartment of Clinical Medicine,Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki University,Nagasaki,Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7719-9631

R MiyaharaDepartment of Clinical Medicine,Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki University,Nagasaki,Japan.

K AriyoshiDepartment of Clinical Medicine,Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki University,Nagasaki,Japan.

K MorimotoDepartment of Clinical Medicine,Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nagasaki University,Nagasaki,Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because of a lack of gold standard diagnostics, a combination of multiple diagnostic tests, or composite diagnostic standard, has been used to measure pneumococcal pneumonia (PP) in pneumococcal vaccine trials. We estimated the accuracy of composite diagnostic standards for PP used in previous randomised controlled trials by simple formulas. A systematic literature review identified five eligible trials and all trials had used different combinations of diagnostic tests for PP. The estimated values of sensitivity and minimum specificity of composite diagnostic standards varied substantially between trials: 48.4% to 98.1% and 71.0% to 97.3%, respectively. Without standardizing the outcome measurements, pneumococcal vaccine efficacy estimates against PP are not comparable between trials and their pooled estimates are biased.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansPneumococcal VaccinesPneumonia, PneumococcalSensitivity and SpecificityPneumococcal Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID29606164

DOI10.1017/S0950268818000651

PMCPMC9134358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

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.