SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2023
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for diagnosing tuberculous meningitis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis of Tuberculous Meningitis: Integrating Clinical Assessment and Molecular Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Tuberculous meningoencephalitis concurrent with autoimmune glial fibrillary acidic protein astrocytopathy: a case report.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- The Predictive Value of Dynamic Changes in Procalcitonin and C-Reactive Protein in Evaluating Response of Patients with Pulmonary Tuberculosis in the Early Treatment.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Chronic meningitis: diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2025Review
- Neonatal microbiome dysbiosis decoded by mNGS: from mechanistic insights to precision interventions.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Molecular diagnostic methods for rapid diagnosis of central nervous system infections.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Review
- Development and validation of a diagnostic model for tuberculous meningitis based on laboratory data.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- The value of nanopore sequencing as a diagnostic tool in tuberculous meningitis: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Article
- Mycobacterium tuberculosis combine with EBV infection in severe adult meningoencephalitis: a rare case reports and literature review.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
- Identification ofInfection and drug resistance · 2024Review
- Illumina and Nanopore sequencing in culture-negative samples from suspected lower respiratory tract infection patients.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in the diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis (TBM) remains uncertain. We performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate its diagnostic accuracy for the early diagnosis of TBM. Methods: English (PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase) and Chinese (CNKI, Wanfang, and CBM) databases were searched for relevant studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of mNGS for TBM. Review Manager was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and Stata was used to perform the statistical analysis. Results: Of 495 relevant articles retrieved, eight studies involving 693 participants (348 with and 345 without TBM) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of mNGS for diagnosing TBM were 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.76), 99% (95% CI: 0.94-1.00), 139.08 (95% CI: 8.54-2266), 0.38 (95% CI: 0.25-0.58), 364.89 (95% CI: 18.39-7239), and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98), respectively. Conclusions: mNGS showed good specificity but moderate sensitivity; therefore, a more sensitive test should be developed to assist in the diagnosis of TBM.
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.