SynthesisLa Tunisie medicale2024
Synthesis in La Tunisie medicale, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionThe grading of glial tumors is based on morphological and sometimes on molecular features. Many markers have been assessed in order to grade the glial tumours without a real consensus. Some authors reported that SRSF1, a spiling factor, presents an expression correlated to the tumours grades.
aimIn this study, we aimed to assess the utility of the SRSF1 into the grading of gliomas based on its immunohistochemical expression.
methodsThe authors conducted a meta-analysis under the PRISMA guidelines during a 10-year-period (2013-2023). The Meta-Disc software 5.4 (free version) was used. Q test and I2 statistics were carried out to explore the heterogeneity among studies. Meta-regression was performed in case of significant heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot test and the Egger's test (free version JASP).
resultsAccording to the inclusion criteria, 4 studies from 193 articles were included. The pooled SEN, SPE and DOR accounted respectively for 0.592, 0.565 and 1.852. The AUC was estimated to 0.558 suggesting a bad diagnostic accuracy. The heterogeneity in the pooled SEN and SPE was statistically significant. The meta-regression analysis focusing on the technique used, the clones, the dilution, the interpretation technique revealed no covariate factors (P>0.05).
conclusionEven if this meta-analysis highlighted the absence of a real diagnostic utility of the SRSF1 in grading the glial tumours, the heterogeneity revealed reinforces the need for more prospective studies performed according to the quality assessment criteria.
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.