ArticleBiomedical reports2020
Diagnostic value of circular RNAs in female reproductive system diseases: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.
Article in Biomedical reports, 2020. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are novel non-coding RNAs that have been reported to be involved in the progression of numerous diseases. However, the clinical diagnostic value of circRNAs in female reproductive system diseases remains unknown. The present study is a systemic review and meta-analysis of the available literature on circRNAs as novel biomarkers for female reproductive system diseases. Relevant studies were systematically searched using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. The data obtained from the included studies were analyzed by RevMan5.3 and STATA 14.2. A total of six studies involving 613 individuals across three types of disease examined the diagnostic capabilities of circRNAs. Within these publications, the pooled sensitivity of circRNAs was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.64-0.76), and the pooled specificity was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.64-0.75). The pooled positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 2.33 and 0.42, respectively. The diagnostic score was 1.70 and the pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 5.48. The area under the summary receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72-0.79), indicating that circRNAs exhibited a moderate diagnostic value for female reproductive system diseases and may function as potential diagnostic biomarkers. However, further studies are required to verify the clinical applications of circRNAs.
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.