SynthesisResearch synthesis methods2023
Limits in the search date for rapid reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies.
Synthesis in Research synthesis methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Photobiomodulation for the treatment and prevention of chemotherapy- and/or radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials published in the last six years.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Manifestations and Impacts of Racial Aggressions on Black Individuals' Health and Well-Being in University Settings Across Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Countries: Protocol for an Integrative Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Health gains from rehabilitation programs implemented by nurses for older people with impaired mobility and self-care deficit: A scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Review
- Overcrowding Indicators in Emergency Departments Across Countries: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Review
- The Use of Electronic Health Records in Physiotherapy Practice: Protocol for a Scoping Review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Biologic Therapies and Quality of Life in Pediatric Patients with Asthma: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Upper Extremity Function Training (Gloreha) on Upper Extremities Function After Stroke: Systematic Review.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Review
- Article
- The impact of core training on overall athletic performance in different sports: a comprehensive meta-analysis.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- An exploration of available methods and tools to improve the efficiency of systematic review production: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Data extraction error in pharmaceutical versus non-pharmaceutical interventions for evidence synthesis: Study protocol for a crossover trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
- How to develop rapid reviews of diagnostic tests according to experts: A qualitative exploration of researcher views.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
- Redefining the High-Output Stoma and Its Bearing on Clinical Practice Results of an International Consensus Panel.Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses SocietyArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
Limiting the search date is a common approach utilised in therapeutic/interventional rapid reviews. Yet the accuracy of pooled estimates is unknown when applied to rapid reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies. Data from all systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, until February 2022 were collected. Meta-analyses with at least five studies were included to emulate rapid reviews by limiting the search to the recent 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 years. The magnitude of the pooled area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity for the full meta-analysis and the rapid reviews were compared. A total of 846 diagnostic meta-analyses were included. When the search date was limited to the recent 10 and 15 years, more than 75% and 80% of meta-analyses presented less than 5% difference between the pooled AUC, sensitivity and specificity of the full meta-analysis and the rapid review. There was little gain in the precision of the pooled estimates when the emulated rapid reviews included more than 15 years in the search. Rapid reviews restricted by search date are a valid and reliable approach for diagnostic test accuracy studies. Robust evidence can be achieved by restricting the search date to the recent 10-15 years. Future studies need to examine the reduction in workload and time to finish the rapid reviews under different search date limits.
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.