ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2019
Diagnostic accuracy of specific IgG antibodies for bird fancier's lung: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concurrence of bird-related hypersensitivity pneumonitis and systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2025Article
- Development of a Diagnostic Biosensor Method of Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis towards a Point-of-Care Biosensor.Biosensors · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSerologic assays for specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies are available for diagnosing the condition of bird fancier's lung, however, their usefulness is controversial. This systematic review was aimed at investigating the diagnostic accuracy of specific IgG antibodies used for avian antigens.
methodsMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Web of Science were searched for studies performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Ouchterlony method, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), electrosyneresis, and ImmunoCAP assays for diagnosing bird fancier's lung. Nine articles were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were summarized using a bivariate mixed-effects model, and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve was rendered to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the antibodies.
resultsThe pooled sensitivities and specificities of each specific IgG antibody were 82.9% (95% confidence interval, 71.1-90.5%) and 93.0% (95% confidence interval, 74.4-98.4%) for the Ouchterlony method, 92.5% (95% confidence interval, 71.3-98.4%) and 90.8% (95% confidence interval, 72.1-97.4%) for ELISAs, 90.0% (95% confidence interval, 55.5-99.7%) and 84.6% (95% confidence interval, 73.5-92.4%) for the electrosyneresis method, and 43.5% (95% confidence interval, 35.3-52.1%) and 100% (95% confidence interval, 0-100%) for ImmunoCAP assays. The overall quality of the collective evidence was low, primarily due to the high risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision of the included studies.
conclusionsThe Ouchterlony method demonstrated high specificity, the ELISA method showed high sensitivity, and the diagnostic utilities of electrosyneresis and ImmunoCAP assay testing remain unclear.
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.