ArticleMedicine2019
Biomarkers for detecting prostate cancer: Protocol for an umbrella review with integrated network meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer (PCa) is common, with it being the 2nd most prevalent cancer in men worldwide and the 6th leading cause of death in men. Screening for any type of cancer aims to increase the chances of successful treatment through early detection of the disease. There were some systematic reviews (SRs) evaluated the diagnostic value of biomarkers for the diagnosis of PCa and no studies have been conducted to analyze the quality of these SRs. We are not clear which kind of marker is the best choice. Thus, this study aims to assess the methodologic quality of the SRs and reanalyze the published data based on SRs for the biomarkers to find the optimal biomarker for the early diagnosis of PCa.
methodsWe performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library and to identify relevant SRs from inception to April 2019. Diagnostic accuracy studies included any type of single biomarker or combined biomarkers aimed at evaluating the diagnostic value is considered eligible for this overview. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) instrument will be used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included SRs. Standard pairwise meta-analysis and adjusted indirect comparison will be used to compare the diagnostic value of different biomarkers.
resultsThe results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.
conclusionThis study will reanalyze the published data based on SRs. We hope that the results will help find a biomarker with the superior diagnostic performance for the diagnosis of PCa. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019125880.
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.