三种检测方法诊断COVID-19敏感性比较的meta分析

Elmas Pınar Kahraman Kılbaş, Imdat Kilbas, I. Ciftci
{"title":"三种检测方法诊断COVID-19敏感性比较的meta分析","authors":"Elmas Pınar Kahraman Kılbaş, Imdat Kilbas, I. Ciftci","doi":"10.5812/jkums-119539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Accurate detection of the global epidemic-causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is for disease surveillance. Additionally, RT-qPCR has been accepted as a reference test and is widely used for this purpose. However, RT-qPCR applications are not possible in all health centers. Therefore, the tests commonly used in the diagnosis of infectious disease should be evaluated from all angles to assess their potential role in the prognosis and management of COVID-19 patients. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic sensitivity of point of care (POC), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and computed tomography (CT) used in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted via searching in databases such as NCBI, Google Scholar, and Medline in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA). Results: The pooled sensitivity of POC, ELISA, and CT was estimated at 68.62%, 88.05%, and 75.43%, respectively. In addition, the mean correct positivity rate of POC, ELISA, and CT was calculated to be 68.61%, 88.04%, and 79.25%, respectively. The sensitivity and true positivity rate of ELISA was observed to be the highest. Conclusions: According to the results, ELISA is a more accurate approach to the diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to POC and CT owing to its high sensitivity and true positivity rate, low false negative rate, short processing time, and simple study procedure. Although helpful in diagnosis, confirmation of ELISA results by polymerase chain reaction remains the ‘gold standard’.","PeriodicalId":16201,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Meta-Analysis on The Comparison of The Sensitivity of Three Test Methods Used in the Diagnosis of COVID-19\",\"authors\":\"Elmas Pınar Kahraman Kılbaş, Imdat Kilbas, I. Ciftci\",\"doi\":\"10.5812/jkums-119539\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Accurate detection of the global epidemic-causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is for disease surveillance. Additionally, RT-qPCR has been accepted as a reference test and is widely used for this purpose. However, RT-qPCR applications are not possible in all health centers. Therefore, the tests commonly used in the diagnosis of infectious disease should be evaluated from all angles to assess their potential role in the prognosis and management of COVID-19 patients. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic sensitivity of point of care (POC), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and computed tomography (CT) used in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted via searching in databases such as NCBI, Google Scholar, and Medline in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA). Results: The pooled sensitivity of POC, ELISA, and CT was estimated at 68.62%, 88.05%, and 75.43%, respectively. In addition, the mean correct positivity rate of POC, ELISA, and CT was calculated to be 68.61%, 88.04%, and 79.25%, respectively. The sensitivity and true positivity rate of ELISA was observed to be the highest. Conclusions: According to the results, ELISA is a more accurate approach to the diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to POC and CT owing to its high sensitivity and true positivity rate, low false negative rate, short processing time, and simple study procedure. Although helpful in diagnosis, confirmation of ELISA results by polymerase chain reaction remains the ‘gold standard’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5812/jkums-119539\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/jkums-119539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:准确检测2019年全球流行的冠状病毒病(COVID-19)是疾病监测的重要内容。此外,RT-qPCR已被公认为参考检测,并被广泛用于此目的。然而,RT-qPCR应用并不可能在所有的卫生中心。因此,应从各个角度对传染病诊断中常用的检测方法进行评价,以评估其在COVID-19患者预后和管理中的潜在作用。目的:本研究旨在比较护理点(POC)、酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)和计算机断层扫描(CT)在COVID-19诊断中的敏感性。方法:按照系统评价和meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA),在NCBI、Google Scholar、Medline等数据库中进行检索和meta分析。结果:POC、ELISA和CT的综合敏感性分别为68.62%、88.05%和75.43%。POC、ELISA和CT的平均正确阳性率分别为68.61%、88.04%和79.25%。ELISA的灵敏度和真阳性率最高。结论:ELISA检测具有灵敏度高、真阳性率高、假阴性率低、处理时间短、研究流程简单等优点,较POC和CT诊断COVID-19更为准确。虽然有助于诊断,但聚合酶链反应证实ELISA结果仍然是“金标准”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Meta-Analysis on The Comparison of The Sensitivity of Three Test Methods Used in the Diagnosis of COVID-19
Background: Accurate detection of the global epidemic-causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is for disease surveillance. Additionally, RT-qPCR has been accepted as a reference test and is widely used for this purpose. However, RT-qPCR applications are not possible in all health centers. Therefore, the tests commonly used in the diagnosis of infectious disease should be evaluated from all angles to assess their potential role in the prognosis and management of COVID-19 patients. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic sensitivity of point of care (POC), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and computed tomography (CT) used in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted via searching in databases such as NCBI, Google Scholar, and Medline in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA). Results: The pooled sensitivity of POC, ELISA, and CT was estimated at 68.62%, 88.05%, and 75.43%, respectively. In addition, the mean correct positivity rate of POC, ELISA, and CT was calculated to be 68.61%, 88.04%, and 79.25%, respectively. The sensitivity and true positivity rate of ELISA was observed to be the highest. Conclusions: According to the results, ELISA is a more accurate approach to the diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to POC and CT owing to its high sensitivity and true positivity rate, low false negative rate, short processing time, and simple study procedure. Although helpful in diagnosis, confirmation of ELISA results by polymerase chain reaction remains the ‘gold standard’.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信