SynthesisYonsei medical journal2022
Evaluation of CRISPR-Based Assays for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Yonsei medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Use of CRISPR-Cas Systems for Viral Detection: A Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Review.Biosensors · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Opportunities and Challenges in Gas Sensor Technologies for Accurate Detection of COVID-19.Biosensors · 2025Review
- A review on the mechanism and potential diagnostic application of CRISPR/Cas13a system.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2025Review
- Review
- CRISPR Assays for Disease Diagnosis: Progress to and Barriers Remaining for Clinical Applications.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the pathogen of coronavirus disease 2019. Diagnostic methods based on the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) have been developed to detect SARS-CoV-2 rapidly. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of CRISPR for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. MATERIALS AND
methodsStudies published before August 2021 were retrieved from four databases, using the keywords "SARS-CoV-2" and "CRISPR." Data were collected from these publications, and the sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted for analysis with MetaDiSc 1.4. The Stata 15.0 software was used to draw Deeks' funnel plots to evaluate publication bias.
resultsWe performed a pooled analysis of 38 independent studies shown in 30 publications. The reference standard was reverse transcription-quantitative PCR. The results indicated that the sensitivity of CRISPR-based methods for diagnosis was 0.94 (95% CI 0.93-0.95), the specificity was 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.99), the PLR was 34.03 (95% CI 20.81-55.66), the NLR was 0.08 (95% CI 0.06-0.10), and the DOR was 575.74 (95% CI 382.36-866.95). The area under the curve was 0.9894.
conclusionStudies indicate that a diagnostic method based on CRISPR has high sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, this would be a potential diagnostic tool to improve the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 detection.
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.