ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
The value of histopathology combined with CapitalBio
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of pathogen detection methods in spinal infections: a retrospective study of 287 cases.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Rapid Triage of Smear-Positive Tuberculosis Suspects with a Commercial DNA Microarray: A Real-World Experience from 1100 Sputum Specimens.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Evaluation and Comparison of Laboratory Methods in Diagnosing Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Nontuberculous Mycobacteria in 3012 Sputum Samples.The clinical respiratory journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of CapitalBio Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical information of suspected STB. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under the curve (AUC) of histopathology, CapitalBio test, and histopathology combined with CapitalBio test were calculated to evaluate their diagnostic efficacy compared with a composite reference standard. Results: A total of 222 suspected STB patients were included in the study. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and AUC of histopathology for STB were recorded to be 62.0, 98.0, 97.4, 68.3%, and 0.80, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and AUC of the CapitalBio test were 75.2, 98.0, 97.9, 76.7%, and 0.87, respectively, while that of histopathology combined with the CapitalBio test was 81.0, 96.0, 96.1, 80.8%, and 0.89, respectively. Conclusion: Histopathology and CapitalBio test exhibited high accuracy and are recommended in diagnosing STB. Histopathology combined with the CapitalBio test might give the best efficacy in STB diagnosis.
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.