SynthesisThe Journal of international medical research2025
Diagnostic accuracy of high-resolution melting curve analysis for discrimination of oncology-associated
Synthesis in The Journal of international medical research, 2025. 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.
- Review
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
objectiveTo investigate the diagnostic value of high-resolution melting (HRM) analysis for oncology-associated epidermal growth factor receptor (
methodsWe systematically searched Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for HRM and
resultsTwenty-six articles were obtained from 416 references. The overall diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were high at 0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-0.96] and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99-0.99), respectively. Other indicators, including the positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio, were 144.91 (95% CI: 69.07-304.04), 0.08 (95% CI: 0.04-0.13), and 2405.21 (95% CI: 1231.87-4696.13), respectively. The Q value of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.979, and the area under the curve was 0.997.
conclusionAs a pre-screening method, the high specificity, sensitivity, low cost, rapid turnaround, and simplicity of HRM make it a good alternative for clinical practice, but positive results must still be obtained for diagnostic confirmation. This study provides a transparent overview of relevant studies in design and conduct.
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.