ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Validity of Mehrviru
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundValid diagnostic tests for human papillomavirus (HPV) detection are crucial to identify individuals at high risk of cervical cancer. We assessed and compared the validity of Mehrviru HPV genotyping and Sacace (HPV Genotypes 14 Real-TM Quant) for molecular detection of 14 high-risk human papillomaviruses.
methodsWe used three HPV test results to identify HPV-positive individuals (14 high-risk genotypes) in a specialist gynecology clinic. The HPV test results were collected using Mehrviru
resultsWe examined 117 women at high risk of HPV infection. The mean age (SD) was 37.2 (9.1). According to LCA, 28.6% of participants had an HPV infection. The sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) of the Mehrviru were 90.8% (73.7-97.2%) and 90.9% (82.1-95.6%), and corresponding figures for Sacace were 92.0% (72.3-98.1%) and 97.4% (90.2-99.3%). The kappa index between the Mehrviru and Sacace kits was 69.7% (55.6-83.9%). The area under the ROC curve for Mehrviru and Sacace test were 91.4% (85.7-97.1%) and 94.4% (89.3-99.5%).
conclusionsThere is an excellent agreement between Mehrviru and Sacace test results, and the diagnostic accuracy indices were similar.
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.