SynthesisFrontiers in microbiology2025
Fast but accurate: a systematic review and meta-analysis on diagnostic performance of MRSA detection in clinical samples by using CRISPR-based rapid molecular methods.
Synthesis in Frontiers in microbiology, 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.
- A comprehensive review of emerging therapeutic strategies against methicillin-resistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Methicillin-resistant Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was conducted using search terms related to MRSA, CRISPR/Cas, diagnostic accuracy, and rapid detection. Studies reporting sensitivity and specificity with extractable 2 × 2 contingency tables were included. Quality was assessed via QUADAS-2. Meta-disc 1.4.0 and Stata 16.0 were used for statistical analysis, including pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC). Median detection time and subgroup analyses were also conducted. Results: Twelve studies were included. The results showed that the CRISPR-based methods showed a pooled sensitivity of 99% (95% CI: 97-100%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI: 99-100%), with a PLR of 32.68 (95% CI: 15.45-69.15), NLR of 0.03 (95% CI: 0.02-0.07), and DOR of 664.25 (95% CI: 234.59-1880.84). The median detection time across included studies was 60 min (IQR: 41.25-98.75 min). Conclusion: CRISPR-based molecular assays demonstrated exceptional accuracy and rapid detection capability for MRSA in clinical settings, significantly outperforming conventional methods. However, potential publication bias and methodological limitations warrant cautious interpretation of these results. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD420251115439.
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.