SynthesisPloS one2020
Immunochromatography for the diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Trends in the Proportion of Macrolide-Resistant Mycoplasma pneumoniae Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Development of a Quantitative Detection System forDentistry journal · 2026Article
- Molecular Diagnostics, Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns, and Clinical Outcomes in Hospitalized Pneumonia Patients: A Prospective Study from Jordan and a Call for National Guideline Integration.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Detection of Respiratory Pathogens in Saliva and Mouthwash Samples in Children.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2025Article
- Refractory and Relapsing Laryngeal Edema Possibly Associated With Chronic Tonsillitis and Mycoplasma Infection, Requiring Reintubation and Tracheostomy.Case reports in medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of "hock-a-loogie" saliva versus nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detecting common respiratory pathogens.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Characteristics of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with other respiratory pathogens identified by rapid diagnostic test.Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy · 2023Article
- The value of lung ultrasound in assessing the degree of lesions in children with mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
- Clinical analysis of the epidemiology and changes in inflammatory indexes ofTranslational pediatrics · 2022Article
- Clinical significance of respiratory virus coinfection in children with Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2022Article
- Clinical significance of Mycoplasma pneumoniae specific IgM titer in children hospitalized with Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of immunochromatographic tests (ICTs) for the detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae. Medline/Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science were searched through June 12, 2019 for relevant studies that used ICTs for the detection of M. pneumoniae infection with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or microbial culturing as reference standards. Pooled diagnostic accuracy with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using a bivariate random effects model. We also constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves and calculated the area under the curve (AUC). Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated by χ2 test or Cochrane's Q test. Thirteen studies including 2,235 samples were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing M. pneumoniae infection were 0.70 (95% CI: 0.59-0.79) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.87-0.95), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio (LR) was 8.94 (95% CI: 4.90-14.80), negative LR 0.33 (95% CI: 0.22-0.46), diagnostic odds ratio 29.20 (95% CI: 10.70-64.20), and AUC 0.904. In subgroup analysis, ICTs demonstrated similar pooled sensitivities and specificities in populations of children only and mixed populations (children + adults). Specimens obtained from oropharyngeal swabs exhibited a higher sensitivity and specificity than those of nasopharyngeal swab. Moreover, pooled estimates of sensitivity and accuracy for studies using PCR as a reference standard were higher than those using culture. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of Ribotest Mycoplasma®, the commercial kit most commonly used in the included studies, were 0.66 and 0.89, respectively. Overall, ICT is a rapid user-friendly method for diagnosing M. pneumoniae infection with moderate sensitivity, high specificity, and high accuracy. This suggests that ICT may be useful in the diagnostic workup of M. pneumoniae infection; however, additional studies are needed for evaluating the potential impact of ICT in clinical practice.
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.