scholarly journals Diagnostic Accuracy of Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy for the Diagnosis of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (23) ◽  
pp. 12390
Author(s):  
Sneha Sethi ◽  
Xiangqun Ju ◽  
Richard M. Logan ◽  
Paul Sambrook ◽  
Robert A. McLaughlin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Likelihood Ratios

Background: Advances in treatment approaches for patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) have been unsuccessful in preventing frequent recurrences and distant metastases, leading to a poor prognosis. Early detection and prevention enable an improved 5-year survival and better prognosis. Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy (CLE) is a non-invasive imaging instrument that could enable an earlier diagnosis and possibly help in reducing unnecessary invasive surgical procedures. Objective: To present an up to date systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CLE in diagnosing OSCC. Materials and Methods. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were explored up to 30 June 2021, to collect articles concerning the diagnosis of OSCC through CLE. Screening: data extraction and appraisal was done by two reviewers. The quality of the methodology followed by the studies included in this review was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. A random effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Results: Six studies were included, leading to a total number of 361 lesions in 213 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 95% (95% CI, 92–97%; I2 = 77.5%) and 93% (95% CI, 90–95%; I2 = 68.6%); the pooled positive likelihood ratios and negative likelihood ratios were 10.85 (95% CI, 5.4–21.7; I2 = 55.9%) and 0.08 (95% CI, 0.03–0.2; I2 = 83.5%); and the pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 174.45 (95% CI, 34.51–881.69; I2 = 73.6%). Although risk of bias and heterogeneity is observed, this study validates that CLE may have a noteworthy clinical influence on the diagnosis of OSCC, through its high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusions: This review indicates an exceptionally high sensitivity and specificity of CLE for diagnosing OSCC. Whilst it is a promising diagnostic instrument, the limited number of existing studies and potential risk of bias of included studies does not allow us to draw firm conclusions. A conclusive inference can be drawn when more studies, possibly with homogeneous methodological approach, are performed.

scholarly journals Rapid diagnostic test for antenatal syphilis screening in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Phang Romero Casas ◽  
Marrissa Martyn-St James ◽  
Jean Hamilton ◽  
Daniel S Marinho ◽  
Rodolfo Castro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Antenatal Clinics

ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the test performance including sensitivity and specificity of rapid immunochromatographic syphilis (ICS) point-of-care (POC) tests at antenatal clinics compared with reference standard tests (non-treponemal (TP) and TP tests) for active syphilis in pregnant women.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CRD, Cochrane Library and LILACS) to March 2016 for diagnostic accuracy studies of ICS test and standard reference tests for syphilis in pregnant women. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). A bivariate meta-analysis was undertaken to generate pooled estimates of diagnostic parameters. Results were presented using a coupled forest plot of sensitivity and specificity and a scatter plot.ResultsThe methodological quality of the five included studies with regards to risk of bias and applicability concern judgements was either low or unclear. One study was judged as high risk of bias for patient selection due to exclusion of pregnant women with a previous history of syphilis, and one study was judged at high risk of bias for study flow and timing as not all patients were included in the analysis. Five studies contributed to the meta-analysis, providing a pooled sensitivity and specificity for ICS of 0.85 (95% CrI: 0.73 to 0.92) and 0.98 (95% CrI: 0.95 to 0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThis review and meta-analysis observed that rapid ICS POC tests have a high sensitivity and specificity when performed in pregnant women at antenatal clinics. However, the methodological quality of the existing evidence base should be taken into consideration when interpreting these results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016036335.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m2516 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayara Lisboa Bastos ◽  
Gamuchirai Tavaziva ◽  
Syed Kunal Abidi ◽  
Jonathon R Campbell ◽  
Louis-Patrick Haraoui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Serological Test ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Serological Tests ◽  
Immunoglobulin Class

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (covid-19).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, bioRxiv, and medRxiv from 1 January to 30 April 2020, using subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of covid-19 and serological tests for covid-19.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies measured sensitivity or specificity, or both of a covid-19 serological test compared with a reference standard of viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Studies were excluded with fewer than five participants or samples. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random effects bivariate meta-analyses.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity, stratified by method of serological testing (enzyme linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs), or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)) and immunoglobulin class (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by study or participant characteristics, including time since symptom onset.Results5016 references were identified and 40 studies included. 49 risk of bias assessments were carried out (one for each population and method evaluated). High risk of patient selection bias was found in 98% (48/49) of assessments and high or unclear risk of bias from performance or interpretation of the serological test in 73% (36/49). Only 10% (4/40) of studies included outpatients. Only two studies evaluated tests at the point of care. For each method of testing, pooled sensitivity and specificity were not associated with the immunoglobulin class measured. The pooled sensitivity of ELISAs measuring IgG or IgM was 84.3% (95% confidence interval 75.6% to 90.9%), of LFIAs was 66.0% (49.3% to 79.3%), and of CLIAs was 97.8% (46.2% to 100%). In all analyses, pooled sensitivity was lower for LFIAs, the potential point-of-care method. Pooled specificities ranged from 96.6% to 99.7%. Of the samples used for estimating specificity, 83% (10 465/12 547) were from populations tested before the epidemic or not suspected of having covid-19. Among LFIAs, pooled sensitivity of commercial kits (65.0%, 49.0% to 78.2%) was lower than that of non-commercial tests (88.2%, 83.6% to 91.3%). Heterogeneity was seen in all analyses. Sensitivity was higher at least three weeks after symptom onset (ranging from 69.9% to 98.9%) compared with within the first week (from 13.4% to 50.3%).ConclusionHigher quality clinical studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for covid-19 are urgently needed. Currently, available evidence does not support the continued use of existing point-of-care serological tests.Study registrationPROSPERO CRD42020179452.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of combined cardiac troponin and copeptin assessment for early rule-out of myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana Raskovalova ◽  
Raphael Twerenbold ◽  
Paul O Collinson ◽  
Till Keller ◽  
Hélène Bouvaist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Cardiac Troponin ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Myocardial Necrosis ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Rule Out

Aims: This systematic review aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of combined cardiac troponin (cTn) and copeptin assessment in comparison to cTn alone for early rule-out of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: Primary studies were eligible if they evaluated diagnostic accuracy for cTn with and without copeptin in patients with symptoms suggestive of AMI. AMI was defined according to the universal definition, using detection of cTn as a marker for myocardial necrosis. Eligible studies were identified by searching electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, CINAHL, Pascal, and Cochrane) from inception to March 2013, reviewing conference proceedings and contacting field experts and the copeptin manufacturer. Results: In 15 studies totalling 8740 patients (prevalence of AMI 16%), adding copeptin improved the sensitivity of cTn assays (from 0.87 to 0.96, p=0.003) at the expense of lower specificity (from 0.84 to 0.56, p<0.001). In 12 studies providing data for 6988 patients without ST-segment elevation, the summary sensitivity and specificity estimates were 0.95 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.98) and 0.57 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.65) for the combined assessment of cTn and copeptin. When a high-sensitivity cTnT assay was used in combination with copeptin, the summary sensitivity and specificity estimates were 0.98 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.00) and 0.50 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.58). Conclusion: Despite substantial between-study heterogeneity, this meta-analysis demonstrates that copeptin significantly improves baseline cTn sensitivity. Management studies are needed to establish the effectiveness and safety of measuring copeptin in combination with high-sensitivity cTnT for early rule-out of AMI without serial testing.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of in VivoReflectance Confocal Microscopy for the Diagnosis of Primary Basal Cell Carcinoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 1462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lupu ◽  
Popa ◽  
Voiculescu ◽  
Caruntu ◽  
Caruntu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Confocal Microscopy ◽  
Basal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Basal Cell ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Likelihood Ratios

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common cancer worldwide and its incidence is constantly rising. Early diagnosis and treatment can significantly reduce patient morbidity and healthcare costs. The value of reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) in non-melanoma skin cancer diagnosis is still under debate. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the diagnostic accuracy of RCM in primary BCC. PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched up to July 05, 2019, to collect articles concerning primary BCC diagnosis through RCM. The studies’ methodological quality was assessed by the QUADAS-2 tool. The meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 13.0, RevMan 5.0, and MetaDisc 1.4 software. We included 15 studies totaling a number of 4163 lesions. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87–0.95; I2= 85.27%) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85–0.97; I2= 94.61%), the pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were 13.51 (95% CI, 5.8–31.37; I2= 91.01%) and 0.08 (95% CI, 0.05–0.14; I2= 84.83%), and the pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 160.31 (95% CI, 64.73–397.02; I2=71%). Despite the heterogeneity and risk of bias, this study demonstrates that RCM, through its high sensitivity and specificity, may have a significant clinical impact on the diagnosis of primary BCC.

Diagnostic accuracy of focused deep venous, lung, cardiac and multiorgan ultrasound in suspected pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2021-216838
Author(s):  
Casper Falster ◽  
Niels Jacobsen ◽  
Karen Ehlers Coman ◽  
Mikkel Højlund ◽  
Thomas Agerbo Gaist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Endobronchial Ultrasound ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Suspected Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Reference Test

ObjectiveTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound in suspected pulmonary embolism.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane library were searched on 2 July 2020 with no restrictions on the date of publication. Subject headings or subheadings combined with text words for the concepts of pulmonary embolism, ultrasound and diagnosis were used.Eligibility criteria and data analysisEligible studies reported sensitivity and specificity of deep venous, lung, cardiac or multiorgan ultrasound in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism, using an adequate reference-test. Prospective, cross-sectional and retrospective studies were considered for eligibility. No restrictions were made on language. Studies were excluded if a control group consisted of healthy volunteers or if transesophageal or endobronchial ultrasound was used. Risk of bias was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2. Meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity was performed by construction of hierarchical summary receiver operator curves. I2 was used to assess the study heterogeneity.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was overall sensitivity and specificity of reported ultrasound signs, stratified by organ approach (deep venous, lung, cardiac and multiorgan). Secondary outcomes were stratum-specific sensitivity and specificity within subgroups defined by pretest probability of pulmonary embolism.Results6378 references were identified, and 70 studies included. The study population comprised 9664 patients with a prevalence of pulmonary embolism of 39.9% (3852/9664). Risk of bias in at least one domain was found in 98.6% (69/70) of included studies. Most frequently, 72.8% (51/70) of studies reported >24 hours between ultrasound examination and reference test or did not disclose time interval at all. Level of heterogeneity ranged from 0% to 100%. Most notable ultrasound signs were bilateral compression of femoral and popliteal veins (22 studies; 4708 patients; sensitivity 43.7% (36.3% to 51.4%); specificity 96.7% (95.4% to 97.6%)), presence of at least one hypoechoic pleural-based lesion (19 studies; 2134 patients; sensitivity 81.4% (73.2% to 87.5%); specificity 87.4% (80.9% to 91.9%)), D-sign (13 studies; 1579 patients; sensitivity 29.7% (24.6% to 35.4%); specificity 96.2% (93.1% to 98.0%)), visible right ventricular thrombus (5 studies; 995 patients; sensitivity 4.7% (2.7% to 8.1%); specificity 100% (99.0% to 100%)) and McConnell’s sign (11 studies; 1480 patients; sensitivity 29.1% (20.0% to 40.1%); specificity 98.6% (96.7% to 99.4%)).ConclusionSeveral ultrasound signs exhibit a high specificity for pulmonary embolism, suggesting that implementation of ultrasound in the initial assessment of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism may improve the selection of patients for radiation imaging.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184313.

scholarly journals Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy in Gastrointestinal and Pancreatobiliary Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Fugazza ◽  
Federica Gaiani ◽  
Maria Clotilde Carra ◽  
Francesco Brunetti ◽  
Michaël Lévy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Gastric Neoplasms ◽  
Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Pancreatic Cysts ◽  
Specific Operator ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE) is an endoscopic-assisted technique developed to obtain histopathological diagnoses of gastrointestinal and pancreatobiliary diseases in real time. The objective of this systematic review is to analyze the current literature on CLE and to evaluate the applicability and diagnostic yield of CLE in patients with gastrointestinal and pancreatobiliary diseases. A literature search was performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Oral Health Group Specialized Register, using pertinent keywords without time limitations. Both prospective and retrospective clinical studies that evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy of CLE were eligible for inclusion. Of 662 articles identified, 102 studies were included in the systematic review. The studies were conducted between 2004 and 2015 in 16 different countries. CLE demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus, gastric neoplasms and polyps, colorectal cancers in inflammatory bowel disease, malignant pancreatobiliary strictures, and pancreatic cysts. Although CLE has several promising applications, its use has been limited by its low availability, high cost, and need of specific operator training. Further clinical trials with a particular focus on cost-effectiveness and medicoeconomic analyses, as well as standardized institutional training, are advocated to implement CLE in routine clinical practice.

scholarly journals Performance of the cuff leak test in adults in predicting post-extubation airway complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Critical Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akira Kuriyama ◽  
Jeffrey L. Jackson ◽  
Jun Kamei
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Airway Obstruction ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Leak Test ◽  
Airway Complications ◽  
Cuff Leak

Abstract Background Clinical practice guidelines recommend performing a cuff leak test in mechanically ventilated adults who meet extubation criteria to screen those at high risk for post-extubation stridor. Previous systematic reviews demonstrated excellent specificity of the cuff leak test but disagreed with respect to sensitivity. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the cuff leak test for predicting post-extubation airway complications in intubated adult patients in critical care settings. Methods We searched Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, the Cochrane Library for eligible studies from inception to March 16, 2020, without language restrictions. We included studies that examined the diagnostic accuracy of cuff leak test if post-extubation airway obstruction after extubation or reintubation was explicitly reported as the reference standard. Two authors in duplicate and independently assessed the risk of bias using the Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. We pooled sensitivities and specificities using generalized linear mixed model approach to bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Our primary outcomes were post-extubation airway obstruction and reintubation. Results We included 28 studies involving 4493 extubations. Three studies were at low risk for all QUADAS-2 risk of bias domains. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of cuff leak test for post-extubation airway obstruction were 0.62 (95% CI 0.49–0.73; I2 = 81.6%) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.82–0.90; I2 = 97.8%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the cuff leak test for reintubation were 0.66 (95% CI 0.46–0.81; I2 = 48.9%) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.83–0.92; I2 = 87.4%), respectively. Subgroup analyses suggested that the type of cuff leak test and length of intubation might be the cause of statistical heterogeneity of sensitivity and specificity, respectively, for post-extubation airway obstruction. Conclusions The cuff leak test has excellent specificity but moderate sensitivity for post-extubation airway obstruction. The high specificity suggests that clinicians should consider intervening in patients with a positive test, but the low sensitivity suggests that patients still need to be closely monitored post-extubation.

scholarly journals Deep learning systems detect dysplasia with human-like accuracy using histopathology and probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shan Guleria ◽  
Tilak U. Shah ◽  
J. Vincent Pulido ◽  
Matthew Fasullo ◽  
Lubaina Ehsan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Learning ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Learning Approaches ◽  
Learning Models ◽  
Whole Slide Image ◽  
Slide Image ◽  
Level Model

AbstractProbe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) allows for real-time diagnosis of dysplasia and cancer in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) but is limited by low sensitivity. Even the gold standard of histopathology is hindered by poor agreement between pathologists. We deployed deep-learning-based image and video analysis in order to improve diagnostic accuracy of pCLE videos and biopsy images. Blinded experts categorized biopsies and pCLE videos as squamous, non-dysplastic BE, or dysplasia/cancer, and deep learning models were trained to classify the data into these three categories. Biopsy classification was conducted using two distinct approaches—a patch-level model and a whole-slide-image-level model. Gradient-weighted class activation maps (Grad-CAMs) were extracted from pCLE and biopsy models in order to determine tissue structures deemed relevant by the models. 1970 pCLE videos, 897,931 biopsy patches, and 387 whole-slide images were used to train, test, and validate the models. In pCLE analysis, models achieved a high sensitivity for dysplasia (71%) and an overall accuracy of 90% for all classes. For biopsies at the patch level, the model achieved a sensitivity of 72% for dysplasia and an overall accuracy of 90%. The whole-slide-image-level model achieved a sensitivity of 90% for dysplasia and 94% overall accuracy. Grad-CAMs for all models showed activation in medically relevant tissue regions. Our deep learning models achieved high diagnostic accuracy for both pCLE-based and histopathologic diagnosis of esophageal dysplasia and its precursors, similar to human accuracy in prior studies. These machine learning approaches may improve accuracy and efficiency of current screening protocols.

scholarly journals Deep learning for pulmonary embolism detection on computed tomography pulmonary angiogram: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelly Soffer ◽  
Eyal Klang ◽  
Orit Shimon ◽  
Yiftach Barash ◽  
Noa Cahan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Deep Learning ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Learning Models ◽  
Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic ◽  
Pulmonary Angiogram

AbstractComputed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the gold standard for pulmonary embolism (PE) diagnosis. However, this diagnosis is susceptible to misdiagnosis. In this study, we aimed to perform a systematic review of current literature applying deep learning for the diagnosis of PE on CTPA. MEDLINE/PUBMED were searched for studies that reported on the accuracy of deep learning algorithms for PE on CTPA. The risk of bias was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted. Seven studies met our inclusion criteria. A total of 36,847 CTPA studies were analyzed. All studies were retrospective. Five studies provided enough data to calculate summary estimates. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for PE detection were 0.88 (95% CI 0.803–0.927) and 0.86 (95% CI 0.756–0.924), respectively. Most studies had a high risk of bias. Our study suggests that deep learning models can detect PE on CTPA with satisfactory sensitivity and an acceptable number of false positive cases. Yet, these are only preliminary retrospective works, indicating the need for future research to determine the clinical impact of automated PE detection on patient care. Deep learning models are gradually being implemented in hospital systems, and it is important to understand the strengths and limitations of these algorithms.

scholarly journals Psoriatic arthritis screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rheumatology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 692-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Iragorri ◽  
Glen Hazlewood ◽  
Braden Manns ◽  
Vishva Danthurebandara ◽  
Eldon Spackman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Screening Questionnaire ◽  
Psa Screening ◽  
Early Psoriatic Arthritis

Abstract Objective To systematically review the accuracy and characteristics of different questionnaire-based PsA screening tools. Methods A systematic review of MEDLINE, Excerpta Medical Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies that evaluated the accuracy of self-administered PsA screening tools for patients with psoriasis. A bivariate meta-analysis was used to pool screening tool-specific accuracy estimates (sensitivity and specificity). Heterogeneity of the diagnostic odds ratio was evaluated through meta-regression. All full-text records were assessed for risk of bias with the QUADAS 2 tool. Results A total of 2280 references were identified and 130 records were assessed for full-text review, of which 42 were included for synthesis. Of these, 27 were included in quantitative syntheses. Of the records, 37% had an overall low risk of bias. Fourteen different screening tools and 104 separate accuracy estimates were identified. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated for the Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation (cut-off = 44), Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation (47), Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screening (8), Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (3) and Early Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Questionnaire (3). The Early Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Questionnaire reported the highest sensitivity and specificity (0.85 each). The I2 for the diagnostic odds ratios varied between 76 and 90.1%. Meta-regressions were conducted, in which the age, risk of bias for patient selection and the screening tool accounted for some of the observed heterogeneity. Conclusions Questionnaire-based tools have moderate accuracy to identify PsA among psoriasis patients. The Early Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Questionnaire appears to have slightly better accuracy compared with the Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screening, Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool and Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation. An economic evaluation could model the uncertainty and estimate the cost-effectiveness of PsA screening programs that use different tools.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document