ArticleGastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench2020
Determination of optimal time for reading of rapid urease test diagnosis of
Article in Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Rapid Urease Test (RUT) Device for Rapid Diagnosis ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Article
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
aimThe study aimed to find the best reading time for the best accuracy of RUT in optimal time to obtain faster results with lower false rates and consequently save time in commencing treatment of peptic ulcers.
backgroundRapid urease test is well known to be an accurate test for
methodsPatients with GI problems referring to a university hospital in Tehran who underwent endoscopy and biopsy were entered in the project and three samples of mucosal tissue were captured from the lesser curvature, the antrum and the body of stomach.
resultsWe found 39.6% sensitivity and 95% specificity for the named test in the first 5 minutes as well as PPV = 95.5% and NPV = 37.3% while the accuracy was 54.79%. Except for the specificity which was constantly 95% in all RUT reading times, other diagnostic parameters increased as time went on. The PPV was also higher than 97% after 10 minutes. The highest values of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy were achieved after 12 hours including 88.7%, 95%, 97.9%, 76% and 90.41%, respectively.
conclusionTo conclude, it seems that there are many different ideas with respect to the rapid urease test in
Indexed as
Identifiers
32821353PMC7417497W3044453981What 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.