SynthesisJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2022
Diagnostic accuracy of glycogen phosphorylase BB for myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Brain-Type Glycogen Phosphorylase (PYGB) in the Pathologies of Diseases: A Systematic Review.Cells · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of glycogen phosphorylase BB for myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Pooled it
- Self-Feeding Living Materials Enabled by Cell Responsive Glycogen Nanoparticles as Metabolic Batteries.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Article
- The Latest Advances in Omics Technology for Assessing Tissue Damage: Implications for the Study of Sudden Cardiac Death.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Cardiovascular Biomarkers: Tools for Precision Diagnosis and Prognosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe tried to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of glycogen phosphorylase BB as a cardiac marker for myocardial infarction.
methodsWe searched through different electronic databases (PubMed, Google-scholar, Embase, and Cochrane Library) to locate relevant articles. Studies, with sufficient data to reconstruct a 2 × 2 contingency table, met our inclusion criteria were included. Three reviewers independently screened the articles. Discrepancies were resolved by other reviewers. Unpublished data were requested from the authors of the study via email. Subsequently, data extraction was done using a standardized form and quality assessment of studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. Meta-analysis was done using a bivariate model using R software.
resultsFourteen studies were selected for the final evaluation, which yielded the summary points: pooled sensitivity 87.77% (77.52%-93.72%, I
conclusionWith these results, we can conclude that GPBB has modest accuracy in screening myocardial infarction, but the limitations of the study warrant further high-quality studies to confirm its usefulness in predicting myocardial infarction (MI).
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.