ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024
Diagnostic Accuracy of Clinical Diagnostic Scoring Systems for Childhood Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of chest ultrasound features to chest radiography in the diagnosis for pediatric tuberculosis: a cross-sectional study.The Pan African medical journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Diagnosis of childhood tuberculosis (TB) poses several challenges. Therefore, point-based scoring systems and diagnostic algorithms have been developed to improve the diagnostic yields in this population. However, there are no updated systematic reviews of the existing childhood TB scoring systems and algorithms. Hence, we systematically reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of the childhood TB diagnostic scoring systems and algorithms. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for relevant articles published until 30 March 2023. QUADAS-2 was used to assess their study quality. Diagnostic accuracy measures (ie, sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, positive and negative likelihood ratios) were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: We included 15 eligible studies, with a total of 7327 study participants aged <15 years, with 10 evaluations of childhood TB diagnostic scoring systems and algorithms. Among these algorithms and scoring systems, only 3 were evaluated more than once. These were the Keith Edwards scoring system with 5 studies (sensitivity, 81.9%; specificity, 81.2%), Kenneth Jones criteria with 3 studies (sensitivity, 80.1%; specificity, 45.7%), and the Ministry of Health-Brazil algorithm with 3 studies (sensitivity, 79.9%; specificity, 73.2%). Conclusions: We recommend using the Keith Edwards scoring system because of its high sensitivity and specificity. Further research is necessary to assess the effectiveness of scoring systems and algorithms in identifying TB in children with HIV and malnutrition.
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.