Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39488711›Full record

SynthesisMalaria journal2024

Diagnostic accuracy of the point-of-care standard G6PD test™ (SD Biosensor) for glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Juan Camilo Martínez, Viviana Vélez-Marín, Mary Lopez-Perez, Daniel F Patiño-Lugo, Ivan D Florez

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Malaria journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Juan Camilo MartínezUnit of Evidence and Deliberation for Decision Making UNED, Medical Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6420-7797
Viviana Vélez-MarínUnit of Evidence and Deliberation for Decision Making UNED, Medical Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9430-3912
Mary Lopez-PerezCentre for Medical Parasitology, Department for Immunology and Microbiology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9876-0248
Daniel F Patiño-LugoUnit of Evidence and Deliberation for Decision Making UNED, Medical Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4030-4255
Ivan D FlorezUnit of Evidence and Deliberation for Decision Making UNED, Medical Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia. ivan.florez@udea.edu.co.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0751-8932

Funding

Independent Research Fund Denmark 013400123B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PDd) is a common genetic enzymopathy that can induce haemolysis triggered by various factors, including some anti-malarial drugs. Although many Point-of-Care (PoC) tests, such as Standard G6PD™ are available to detect G6PDd, its pooled diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) remains unknown.

methodsTo estimate the DTA of StandG6PD-BS at various thresholds of G6PDd, a systematic review with a DTA meta-analysis were conducted, searching EMBASE, MEDLINE, and SciELO databases up to April 4, 2024.The included studies were those that measured G6PD activity using StandG6PD-BS (reference test) and spectrophotometry (gold standard) in patients suspected of having G6PDd. The risk of bias (RoB) of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool and the certainty of evidence (CoE) with the GRADE approach. For the estimation of within-study DTA, a random-effect bivariate meta-analysis was performed to determine the pooled sensitivity and specificity for 30%, 70%, and 80% enzyme levels' thresholds, and a graphical analysis of the heterogeneity using crosshair and Confidence Regions on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) space plots.

resultsAfter screening 2496 reports, four studies were included with 7864 participants covering all thresholds. Two studies had high RoB in QUADAS-2 domains 2 and 3, and the others had low RoB, with low, moderate, and high heterogeneity at the 30%, 70%, and 80% thresholds, respectively. The pooled sensitivity was 99.1%, 95.7%, and 90% for 30%, 70%, and 80% thresholds, respectively. The pooled specificity was 97.4%; 92.9%; and 89.0% for 30%, 70%, and 80% thresholds, respectively.

conclusionStandG6PD-BS is a PoC test with high sensitivity and specificity to detect G6PDd at different thresholds.

Indexed as

Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase DeficiencyPoint-of-Care SystemsBiosensing TechniquesDiagnostic Tests, RoutineGlucosephosphate DehydrogenaseHumansPoint-of-Care TestingSensitivity and SpecificityGlucosephosphate DehydrogenaseGlucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenaseMalariaMetanalysisPoint-of-care testStandard G6PD™Systematic review

Identifiers

PMID39488711
PMCPMC11531698

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.