SynthesisLung2024
Exhaled Volatile Organic Compounds Detection in Pneumonia Screening: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Lung, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- LUNG Year in Review: 2024.Lung · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPneumonia is a common lower respiratory tract infection, and early diagnosis is crucial for timely treatment and improved prognosis. Traditional diagnostic methods for pneumonia, such as chest imaging and microbiological examinations, have certain limitations. Exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) detection, as an emerging non-invasive diagnostic technique, has shown potential application value in pneumonia screening.
methodA systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, with the retrieval time up to March 2024. The inclusion criteria were diagnostic studies evaluating exhaled VOCs detection for the diagnosis of pneumonia, regardless of the trial design type. A meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate model for sensitivity and specificity.
resultsA total of 14 diagnostic studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results demonstrated that exhaled VOCs detection had a combined sensitivity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.95) and a combined specificity of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.81-0.84) in pneumonia screening, with an area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve (AUC) of 0.96. The pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 104.37 (95% CI: 27.93-390.03), and the pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR) were 8.98 (95% CI: 3.88-20.80) and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.05-0.22), indicating a high diagnostic performance.
conclusionThis study highlights the potential of exhaled VOCs detection as an effective, non-invasive screening method for pneumonia, which could facilitate future diagnosis in pneumonia. Further high-quality, large-scale studies are required to confirm the clinical utility of exhaled VOCs detection in pneumonia screening. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, Review no. CRD42024520498.
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.