SynthesisThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2024
Design, Conduct, Analysis, and Reporting of Therapeutic Efficacy Studies in Visceral Leishmaniasis: A Systematic Review of Published Reports, 2000-2021.
Synthesis in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The development of a global research agenda and individual participant data platform for visceral leishmaniasis: challenges and future opportunities.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Blood transfusion in the care of patients with visceral leishmaniasis: a review of practices in therapeutic efficacy studies.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A systematic review (SR) of published efficacy studies in visceral leishmaniasis (VL) was undertaken to describe methodological aspects of design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. Studies published during 2000-2021 and indexed in the Infectious Diseases Data Observatory VL library of clinical studies were eligible for inclusion (N = 89 studies). Of the 89 studies, 40 (44.9%) were randomized, 33 (37.1%) were single-armed, 14 (15.7%) were nonrandomized multiarmed studies, and randomization status was unclear in two (2.2%). After initial screening, disease confirmation was done by microscopy in 26 (29.2%) and by a combination of serology and microscopy in 63 (70.8%). Post-treatment follow-up duration was <6 months in three (3.3%) studies, 6 months in 75 (84.3%), and >6 months in 11 (12.4%) studies. Confirmation of relapse was solely based on clinical suspicion in four (4.5%) studies, parasitological demonstration in 64 (71.9%), using molecular/serological/parasitological method in 6 (6.7%), and there was no information in 15 (16.9%). Of the 40 randomized studies, sample size calculation was reported in only 22 (55.0%) studies. This review highlights substantial variations in definitions adopted for disease diagnosis and therapeutic outcomes suggesting a need for a harmonized trials protocol.
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.