SynthesisInternational ophthalmology2023
Diagnostic accuracy of confocal scan in detecting acanthamoeba keratitis and fungal keratitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel method for standardised imaging of corneal subbasal nerves by in vivo confocal microscopy - a pilot validation study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- In vivo corneal microscopy: from image to insight - where are we going?Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Review
- Diagnostic features of Acanthamoeba keratitis via in vivo confocal microscopy.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Use of in vivo confocal microscopy in suspected Acanthamoeba keratitis: a 12-year real-world data study at a Swedish regional referral center.Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection · 2024Article
- Clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy characteristics of Candida keratitis following keratoplasty.BMC ophthalmology · 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAcanthamoeba keratitis (AK) and fungal keratitis (FK) are two microbial keratitis that cause serious damage and, without early accurate diagnosis and treatment, may lead to blindness. In vivo corneal confocal scan, as an emerging ocular diagnostic method in comparison with microbiological smears and cultures as the gold standard, may assist in accelerating appropriate diagnosis.
objectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of confocal scan for the diagnosis of AK and FK.
methodsData were collected via a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase and Scopus using keywords related to diagnostic accuracy of confocal scan in AK and FK up to October 2022. Pooled data underwent meta-analysis in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of confocal scan for the diagnosis of AK and FK.
resultsThe final 14 relevant studies were identified, including 1950 eyes. Meta-analysis in AK group revealed 94% sensitivity, 87% specificity, 89% PPV, 92% NPV, and DOR of 143.32, and in FK group disclosed 88% sensitivity, 85% specificity, 85% PPV, 88% NPV, and DOR of 75.98.
conclusionThe accuracy of confocal scan for the diagnosis of AK was significantly more than that for detecting FK; despite the limitations such as limited numbers of available retrospective studies for the detection of FK, confocal scan had an acceptable performance in detecting FK eyes. The overall performance of NCS was similar with that of HRT-RCM for the detection of both types of keratitis.
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.