ArticlePloS one2020
Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of nucleic acid amplification tests for abdominal tuberculosis: A protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of nucleic acid amplification tests for abdominal tuberculosis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Xpert MTB/RIF and CapitalBioInfection and drug resistance · 2022Article
- Anlotinib-containing regimen for advanced small-cell lung cancer: A protocol of meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Article
- Neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable esophageal cancer: A protocol of meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbdominal tuberculosis is a severe extrapulmonary tuberculosis, which can lead to serious complications. Early diagnosis and treatment are very important for the prognosis and the diagnosis of abdominal tuberculosis is still difficult. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for abdominal tuberculosis using meta-analysis method.
methodsWe will search PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Wanfang database for studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of NAATs for abdominal tuberculosis until May 2020. We will include a systematic review and meta-analysis that evaluated the accuracy of NAATs for abdominal tuberculosis. Any types of study design with full text will be sought and included. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Stata version 15.0 with the midas command packages will be used to carry out meta-analyses.
resultsThe results will provide clinical evidence for diagnostic accuracy of NAATs for abdominal tuberculosis, and this systematic review and meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.
conclusionThis overview will provide evidence of NAATs for diagnosis of abdominal tuberculosis. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: INPLASY202060030.
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.