SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2023
The diagnostic accuracy of carbon monoxide pulse oximetry in adults with suspected acute carbon monoxide poisoning: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of acute intoxication with carbon monoxide - Polish Medical Society, Section of Clinical Toxicology position statement.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2025Guideline
- Respiratory Emergencies in Disasters: A Narrative Review.Thoracic research and practice · 2026Article
- Agreement and clinical utility of non-invasive SpCO versus arterial COHb in acute carbon monoxide poisoning: a prospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Carbon Monoxide Poisoning: Diagnosis, Prognostic Factors, Treatment Strategies, and Future Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Acute carbon monoxide poisoning (COP) is one of the leading causes of intoxication among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). COP symptoms are not always specific and may vary from mild to critical. In the last few years, COHb pulse oximeters have been developed and applied to the setting of suspected COP. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of CO pulse oximetry (SpCO) with carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) levels measured by blood gas analysis, used as a reference standard, in patients with suspected COP. Methods: We developed our search strategy according to the PICOS framework, population, index/intervention, comparison, outcome, and study, considering the diagnostic accuracy of SpCO compared to COHb levels measured by blood gas analysis, used as a reference standard, in patients with suspected COP enrolled in cross-sectional studies in English. The search was performed on MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE in February 2022. Quality assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 methodology. A COHb cutoff of 10% was chosen to test the sensitivity and specificity of the index test. A bivariate model was used to perform the meta-analysis. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022359144). Results: A total of six studies (1734 patients) were included. The pooled sensitivity of the test was 0.65 (95% CI 0.44-0.81), and the pooled specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.83-0.98). The pooled LR+ was 9.4 (95% CI 4.4 to 20.1), and the pooled LR- was 0.38 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.62). Conclusion: Our results show that SpCO cannot be used as a screening tool for COP in the ED due to its low sensitivity. Because of its high LR+, it would be interesting to evaluate, if SpCO could have a role in the prehospital setting as a tool to quickly identify COP patients and prioritize their transport to specialized hospitals on larger samples with a prospective design.
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.