ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2021
Evaluation of antibody immunochromatography testing for diagnosis of current
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Prevalence ofMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Development and validation of novel diagnostic recombinant surface antigen D5 and cytotoxic gene pathogenesis island Cag11 protein for Helicobacter pylori.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparison of chemiluminiscence versus lateral flow assay for the detection of Helicobacter pylori antigen in human fecal samples.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSUBJECT AND
methodsA total of 117 patients were included in this prospective diagnosis accuracy testing study, who clinically presented with dyspepsia, heartburn, abdominal pain, diarrhea, or halitosis. A stool sample was collected from each patient and tested for
resultsAbout 35 % of sixty six patients who were positive for stool antigen test gave a negative for serum antibodies test. Meanwhile, the non-consistent results within 51 negative stool antigen test patients was exhibited by 47 % of them. The discrepancies were not affected by age or disease duration. The calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive values were 50 %, 65 %, 65 % and 50 % respectively.
conclusionThe serum antibody test is not reliable in the diagnosis of current
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.