SynthesisAging2021
Diagnostic performance of microRNAs in testicular germ cell tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of the microRNA-371a assay in small testicular masses: a real-world cohort study.BJU international · 2026Article
- Exploring the molecular pathways of miRNAs in testicular cancer: from diagnosis to therapeutic innovations.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025Review
- The utility of cfDNA in TGCT patient management: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The sensitivity (Sen) of classic biomarkers for the diagnosis of testicular germ cell tumors (TGCTs) is currently low. Previous studies have shown the diagnostic potential of microRNAs (miRNAs) for TGCTs; however, the results of these studies are inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate their diagnostic value. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched until September 30, 2020 and 18 trials from 11 studies involving 2,068 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Using a bivariate mixed-effects meta-analysis model, the pooled Sen, specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence interval values of total miRNAs were 0.83 (0.73-0.90), 0.95 (0.89-0.98), 15.79 (7.41-33.66), 0.18 (0.11-0.29), 87.13 (41.99-180.82), and 0.95 (0.93-0.97), respectively; however, the observed values of single miR-371a-3p were 0.84 (0.76-0.90), 0.95 (0.91-0.98), 18.41 (9.69-34.97), 0.17 (0.11-0.26), 111.56 (47.72-260.80), and 0.97 (0.95-0.98), respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed that miRNAs that included miR-371a-3p showed higher predictive performance than those that did not (
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.