SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2024
Diagnostic accuracy of serological rk-39 test for visceral Leishmaniasis: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2024. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- [Visceral leishmaniasis with suspected autoimmune disease: A report of 2 cases].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Article
- Performance of Extracellular Vesicles FromJournal of parasitology research · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisceral leishmaniasis (VL), or kala-azar, is a vector-borne tropical disease caused by a group of intracellular hemoflagellate protozoa belonging to the family of Trypanosomatide and the genus Leishmania. The disease is distributed around the world and transmitted via the bite of infected female Phlebotomine sandflies, and there is variation in the diagnostic accuracy. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the pooled global sensitivity and specificity of the rk-39 test and to evaluate if there is a difference between the different parts of the world.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis have been conducted on the diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. After setting eligibility criteria, literature was searched in four databases and one searching engine. Articles were screened, critically appraised, and extracted independently by two reviewers, and any disagreements were resolved with the involvement of a third person. The quality of the included studies had been assessed by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS 2) tool. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were determined by bivariate random effect analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed by Higgins's I2, and when it was present, mitigation was conducted by using sensitivity analysis.
resultA total of 409 studies were identified, and finally 18 articles were eligible for the review with a total sample size of 5, 253. The bivariate random effect meta-analysis of the 7 diagnostic accuracy studies showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.89 (0.76-0.95) and specificity of 0.86 (0.72-0.94). The +LR was 6.32 (95% CI: 2.85-14.02), the-LR was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.06-0.30), and the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 47.8 (95% CI: 11.3-203.2). Abdel-Latif (2018) was both an outlier and influential for sensitivity, and Walter (2011) was both an outlier and influential for specificity, and removing them from sensitivity and specificity, respectively, was beneficial for reducing the heterogeneity.
conclusionRk-39 is found to have highly accurate measures in the diagnosis of visceral leishmaniasis. Both sensitivity and specificity were found to be highly accurate in the diagnosis of leishmaniasis, with a pooled sensitivity of 0.91 (0.88-0.93) and a pooled specificity of 0.89 (0.85-0.91). ETHICAL CONSIDERATION: As we will use secondary data for the systematic review and meta-analysis, ethical concerns are not necessary.
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.