SynthesisPloS one2023
Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of nucleic acid amplification tests for abdominal tuberculosis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A diagnostic dilemma: abdominal tuberculosis mimicking suspected Crohn's disease or latent tuberculosis activated by biologic therapy.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Innovative Approaches in Tuberculosis Diagnosis: Challenges and Future Directions.International journal of MCH and AIDS · 2026Review
- Article
- Diagnostic Challenges in Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis: A Single-Center Experience in a High-Resource Setting at a German Tertiary Care Center.Infectious disease reports · 2025Article
- Accuracy of next-generation sequencing for rapid diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
- Gastrointestinal tuberculosis: Diagnostic approaches for this uncommon pathology.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- The value of nanopore sequencing as a diagnostic tool in tuberculous meningitis: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbdominal tuberculosis (TB) is a severe extrapulmonary TB, which can lead to serious complications. Early diagnosis and treatment are very important for the prognosis and the diagnosis of abdominal TB is still difficult.
methodsWe searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Wanfang database for studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of NAATs for abdominal TB until August 2020. Any types of study design with full text were sought and included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. Subgroup analysis, meta-regression analysis and sensitivity analysis were used to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Stata version 15.0 with the midas command packages was used to carry out meta-analyses.
resultsWe included a total of 78 independent studies from 53 articles; 64 with CRS as the reference standard, and 14 with culture as the reference standard. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the areas under summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves (AUC) were 58% (51%-64%; I2 = 87%), 99% (97%-99%; I2 = 81%), and 0.92 (0.89-0.94) compared with CRS, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the AUC values of the SROC were 80% (66%-90%; I2 = 56%), 96% (92%-98%; I2 = 84%), and 0.97 (0.95-0.98) compared with culture, respectively. The heterogeneity of sensitivity and specificity was significant.
conclusionsNAATs had excellent efficacy in the diagnosis of abdominal TB regardless of the reference standard and regardless of the subtype of abdominal TB. Multiplex PCR with multiple target genes may improve diagnostic sensitivity, and stool specimens may also be used for the diagnosis of abdominal TB in addition to tissue and ascites.
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.