Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32499256›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Point-of-care tests for urinary tract infections: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.

David Fraile Navarro, Frank Sullivan, Amaya Azcoaga-Lorenzo, Virginia Hernandez Santiago

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

David Fraile NavarroDivision of Population and Behavioural Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Saint Andrews, Saint Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1108-7071
Frank SullivanDivision of Population and Behavioural Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Saint Andrews, Saint Andrews, UK.
Amaya Azcoaga-LorenzoDivision of Population and Behavioural Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Saint Andrews, Saint Andrews, UK.
Virginia Hernandez SantiagoDivision of Population and Behavioural Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Saint Andrews, Saint Andrews, UK vhs2@st-andrews.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8544-1483
University of St Andrews · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUrinary tract infections (UTIs) are the second most common type of infection worldwide, accounting for a large number of primary care consultations and antibiotic prescribing. Current diagnosis is based on an empirical approach, relying on symptoms and occasional use of urine dipsticks. The diagnostic reference standard is still urine culture, although it is not routinely recommended for uncomplicated UTIs in the community, due to time to diagnosis (48 hours). Faster point-of-care tests have been developed, but their diagnostic accuracy has not been compared. Our objective is to systematically review and meta-analyse the diagnostic accuracy of currently available point-of-care tests for UTIs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests for UTIs will be included. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to 1 June 2019. Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Meta-analysis will be performed depending on data availability and heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a systematic review protocol and therefore formal ethical approval is not required, as no primary, identifiable, personal data will be collected. Patients or the public were not involved in the design of our research. However, the findings from this review will be shared with key stakeholders, including patient groups, clinicians and guideline developers, and will also be presented and national and international conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018112019.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care TestingDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicUrinary Tract Infectionsdiagnostic microbiologyepidemiologymolecular diagnosticsurinary tract infections

Identifiers

PMID32499256
PMCPMC7282288
OpenAlexW3033463678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.