ArticleBMJ open2026
Sensitivity of immunohistochemistry in the laboratory diagnosis of leprosy: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
introductionLeprosy is a chronic disease caused by the bacillus METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy studies will include analytical observational studies and clinical trials evaluating IHC in human subjects with suspected leprosy. The reference standard will be defined as the identification of acid-fast bacilli in skin biopsy specimens from patients with compatible clinical presentation using conventional staining methods (eg, Fite-Faraco), with the exclusion of alternative mycobacterial infections when applicable. Searches will be conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and BVS/LILACS (Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde/Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature), as well as grey literature sources, at 31 May 2026. Two independent reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction using a standardised Microsoft Excel form and risk of bias assessment using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Sensitivity and specificity estimates will be calculated. If appropriate, a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted using RevMan (Review Manager) and Stata. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because this study will use publicly available data. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.
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.