Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39040853›Full record

ReviewJournal of tropical medicine2024

Evaluation of the Urine POC-CCA Test Accuracy in the Detection of

Getaneh Alemu, Endalkachew Nibret

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of tropical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Prevalence ofEnvironmental health insights · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Getaneh AlemuDepartment of Medical Laboratory Science Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3478-4176
Endalkachew NibretBiology Department Science College Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7063-2877

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Schistosomiasis is a common public health problem throughout the world and Methods: Studies published until May 2022 were searched from PubMed, Google Scholar, and grey literature for systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guideline. Eligible studies were selected based on preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality of included studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using Cochrane Results: Thirty-seven studies published in 29 papers and enrolling 21159 study participants were included for analysis. Overall analysis of Point-of-Care Circulating Cathodic Antigen (POC-CCA) test against KK reference standard revealed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.85-0.87) and 0.66 (95% CI: 0.65-0.67), respectively. Subgroup analysis among 24 studies comparing single POC-CCA with test single KK revealed a high sensitivity (0.88) but low specificity (0.66). Based on findings of 24 studies, the area under the curve (AUC) for the systematic receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was 0.7805, indicating that the POC-CCA test effectively separates those with the disease from those who do not have it. Higher sensitivity estimates of 0.93 and 0.90 were reported when comparisons were made between test results of 2 urine and 1 stool samples, and 3 urine and 3 stool samples, respectively. Single POC-CCA test resulted in a pooled sensitivity estimate of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.84) as evaluated by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) reference test. Conclusions: The POC-CCA test has higher sensitivity than KK and may serve as a routine diagnostic alternative for disease diagnosis, mapping, and monitoring of interventions. However, its accuracy should further be evaluated at different transmission settings and infection intensity.

Identifiers

PMID39040853
PMCPMC11262874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.