ArticlePloS one2024
Diagnostic accuracy of nanopore sequencing for the rapid diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) is the most common type of tuberculosis (TB). Rapid diagnosis of PTB can help in TB control. Although the use of molecular tests (such as the GeneXpert MTB/RIF) has improved the ability to rapidly diagnose PTB, there is still room for improvement. Nanopore sequencing is a novel means of rapid TB detection. The purpose of this study was to establish a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol for evaluating the accuracy of nanopore sequencing for the rapid diagnosis of PTB.
methodsWe completed this protocol according to the Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) statement and registered on the PROSPERO platform. We will screen studies related to nanopore sequencing for diagnosis of PTB by searching through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library using English, and Wanfang database, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) using Chinese. Eligible studies will be screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria established in the study protocol. We will evaluate the methodological quality of the individual included studies using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). We will use Stata (version 15.0) with the midas command and RevMan (version 5.3) for meta-analysis and forest plots and SROC curves generation. A p < 0.05 was treated as a statistically significant difference. When significant heterogeneity exists between studies, we will explore sources of heterogeneity through meta-regression analysis and subgroup analysis.
conclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis of nanopore sequencing for the diagnosis of PTB. We hope that this study will find a new and effective tool for the early diagnosis of PTB. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023495593.
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.