SynthesisBiosensors2021
Accuracy of the Electronic Nose Breath Tests in Clinical Application: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Biosensors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metal-organic frameworks for breath-based sensors: a review.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Review
- Analysis of volatile organic compounds in biological samples of colorectal cancer patients using electronic nose-based machine learning techniques.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Design of an Electronic Nose System with Automatic End-Tidal Breath Gas Collection for Enhanced Breath Detection Performance.Micromachines · 2025Article
- A Review on Long COVID Screening: Challenges and Perspectives Focusing on Exhaled Breath Gas Sensing.ACS sensors · 2025Review
- Residential Proximity Land Use Characteristics and Exhaled Volatile Organic Compounds' Impact on Pulmonary Function in Asthmatic Children.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Article
- Development of Electronic Nose as a Complementary Screening Tool for Breath Testing in Colorectal Cancer.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Application of electronic nose technology in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal diseases: a review.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Review
- Exhaled Biomarkers for Point-of-Care Diagnosis: Recent Advances and New Challenges in Breathomics.Micromachines · 2023Review
- Mask assistance to colorimetric sniffers for detection of Covid-19 disease using exhaled breath metabolites.Sensors and actuators. B, Chemical · 2022Article
- Forecasting the Post-Pandemic Effects of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus Using the Bullwhip Phenomenon Alongside Use of Nanosensors for Disease Containment and Cure.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Modular Point-of-Care Breath Analyzer and Shape Taxonomy-Based Machine Learning for Gastric Cancer Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: An electronic nose applies a sensor array to detect volatile biomarkers in exhaled breath to diagnose diseases. The overall diagnostic accuracy remains unknown. The objective of this review was to provide an estimate of the diagnostic accuracy of sensor-based breath tests for the diagnosis of diseases. (2) Methods: We searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases for studies published between 1 January 2010 and 14 October 2021. The search was limited to human studies published in the English language. Clinical trials were not included in this review. (3) Results: Of the 2418 records identified, 44 publications were eligible, and 5728 patients were included in the final analyses. The pooled sensitivity was 90.0% (95% CI, 86.3-92.8%, I
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.