QUADAS-2 Criteria Research Articles

Towards clinical application of image mining: a systematic review on artificial intelligence and radiomics

PurposeThe aim of this systematic review was to analyse literature on artificial intelligence (AI) and radiomics, including all medical imaging modalities, for oncological and non-oncological applications, in order to assess how far the image mining research stands from routine medical application. To do this, we applied a trial phases classification inspired from the drug development process.MethodsAmong the articles we considered for inclusion from PubMed were multimodality AI and radiomics investigations, with a validation analysis aimed at relevant clinical objectives. Quality assessment of selected papers was performed according to the QUADAS-2 criteria. We developed the phases classification criteria for image mining studies.ResultsOverall 34,626 articles were retrieved, 300 were selected applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and 171 high-quality papers (QUADAS-2 ≥ 7) were identified and analysed. In 27/171 (16%), 141/171 (82%), and 3/171 (2%) studies the development of an AI-based algorithm, radiomics model, and a combined radiomics/AI approach, respectively, was described. A total of 26/27(96%) and 1/27 (4%) AI studies were classified as phase II and III, respectively. Consequently, 13/141 (9%), 10/141 (7%), 111/141 (79%), and 7/141 (5%) radiomics studies were classified as phase 0, I, II, and III, respectively. All three radiomics/AI studies were categorised as phase II trials.ConclusionsThe results of the studies are promising but still not mature enough for image mining tools to be implemented in the clinical setting and be widely used. The transfer learning from the well-known drug development process, with some specific adaptations to the image mining discipline could represent the most effective way for radiomics and AI algorithms to become the standard of care tools.

PP108 Assessing CHA2DS2-VASc Score For Predicting Ischemic Stroke In The Non-Atrial Fibrillation Population

IntroductionCerebrovascular disease is the most common cause of death in China, and the incidence of ischemic stroke (240 per 100,000 people) is higher than that of hemorrhagic stroke (82 per 100,000 people). More than 80 percent of strokes can be prevented by early control of risk factors. Therefore, identifying and managing high-risk groups is a top priority in preventing stroke. The CHA2DS2-VASc score is a key prediction tool for stratifying stroke risk in individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) as follows: zero score is low risk; one is intermediate risk; and two is high risk. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the accuracy of the CHA2DS2-VASc scoring system for stratifying ischemic stroke risk in the non-AF population.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library in June 2018 for relevant diagnostic studies. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 criteria) were performed independently by two authors. Methodological variation across the selected studies precluded meta-analysis, so the results were synthesized narratively.ResultsSeven prospective studies involving 50,652 patients (6,760 with ischemic stroke) were included. The treatment threshold ranged from two to four across the studies. Three studies reported diagnostic accuracy at a threshold of two, with a sensitivity above 0.8 and a specificity ranging from 0.32 to 0.68. The diagnostic odds ratio was greater than two (seven studies). The two studies using a treatment threshold of four reported a sensitivity of 0.59 to 0.76 and a specificity of 0.43 to 0.69. One study used a threshold of three, with a sensitivity of 0.79 and a specificity of 0.39.ConclusionsThe CHA2DS2-VASc score may be used to predict ischemic stroke in the non-atrial fibrillation population. Treatment thresholds greater than two provide more optimal diagnostic accuracy, although the predictive performance of the CHA2DS2-VASc score may be better in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but not AF.

Diagnostic protocols for the management of pregnancy of unknown location: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

There is no international consensus on how to manage women with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL). To present a systematic quantitative review summarising the evidence related to management protocols for PUL. MEDLINE, COCHRANE and DARE databases were searched from 1 January 1984 to 31 January 2017. The primary outcome was accurate risk prediction of women initially diagnosed with a PUL having an ectopic pregnancy (high risk) as opposed to either a failed PUL or intrauterine pregnancy (low risk). All studies written in the English language, which were not case reports or series that assessed women classified as having a PUL at initial ultrasound. Forty-three studies were included. QUADAS-2 criteria were used to assess the risk of bias. We used a novel, linear mixed-effects model and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves for the thresholds of interest. There was a high risk of differential verification bias in most studies. Meta-analyses of accuracy were performed on (i) single human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) cut-off levels, (ii) hCG ratio (hCG at 48 hours/initial hCG), (iii) single progesterone cut-off levels and (iv) the 'M4 model' (a logistic regression model based on the initial hCG and hCG ratio). For predicting an ectopic pregnancy, the areas under the curves (95% CI) for these four management protocols were as follows: (i) 0.42 (0.00-0.99), (ii) 0.69 (0.57-0.78), (iii) 0.69 (0.54-0.81) and (iv) 0.87 (0.83-0.91), respectively. The M4 model was the best available method for predicting a final outcome of ectopic pregnancy. Developing and validating risk prediction models may optimise the management of PUL. Pregnancy of unknown location meta-analysis: M4 model has best test performance to predict ectopic pregnancy.

Diagnostic accuracy of NUDT15 gene variants for thiopurine-induced leukopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We herein conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to estimate diagnostic accuracy of NUDT15 gene polymorphisms for detection of thiopurine-induced leukopenia. Eligible studies were identified through a comprehensive search on PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane and OpenGrey datasets up to April 2018. The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was used as a single measure of diagnostic performance. Sixteen studies including a total of 3538 thiopurine-treated patients fulfilled inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Among these, 16 studies were available for the meta-analysis of rs116855232, 6 studies for rs186364861 and 5 studies for rs554405994 of NUDT15. A higher DOR was found for rs116855232 (8.44, 95% CI: 5.46-13.03), as compared to rs554405994 (4.336, 95% CI 2.924-6.429) or rs186364861 (2.742, 95% CI 1.453-5.175). Results of meta-regression analysis showed that incidence of leukopenia (relative DOR: 0.96; 95%CI: 0.93-1.00, p = 0.037) and leukopenia onset (late vs early leukopenia, relative DOR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.85, p = 0.0189) significantly influenced diagnostic accuracy of rs116855232. Subgroup analysis for rs186364861 and rs554405994 revealed a significant DOR for early-onset leukopenia (rs186364861: 4.04, 95% CI 1.78-9.20; rs554405994: 2.94, 95% CI 1.74-4.95), but not for late-onset leukopenia (rs186364861: 1.52, 95% CI 0.52-4.43; rs554405994: 2.02, 95% CI 0.93-4.40). The present meta-analysis points to rs116855232, rs554405994 and rs186364861 of NUDT15 as clinically relevant predictors of thiopurine-induced leukopenia. Nevertheless, prospective studies of genotype-guided dosing of thiopurines are warranted to prove clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of pretreatment NUDT15 gene testing across different populations.

Accuracy of rapid diagnosis of Talaromyces marneffei: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundTo examine the accuracy of Rapid Diagnosis of Talaromyces marneffei (RDTM) in order to improve diagnosis and treatment for clinical measures and reduce the mortality due to associated infections.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we screened PubMed, Ovid (Cochrane library) and Web of Science, Chinese database CNKI and Wanfang for articles published between 1956 and December, 2017. Data were taken from cross-sectional studies as well as from baseline measurements in longitudinal studies with clinical follow-up. Articles were excluded if they did not contain a cohort with T. marneffei and a control cohort or a cohort with standard fungus culture. Data were extracted by two authors and checked by three for accuracy. For quality assessment, modified QUADAS-2 criteria were used.ResultsThe 26 included diagnostic studies enrolled 5,594 objectives in 632 patients with T. marneffei infections and 2,612 negative controls between 1996 and 2017 in Thailand, Vietnam and China. The total combined sensitivity and specificity of rapid diagnosis of T. marneffei was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.68–0.90) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98–1.00). According to the experimental method, the included studies can be divided into three subgroups, including PCR-based, ELISA-based and others. The results showed these three subgroups had a highly pooled specificity of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99–1.00), 0.99 (0.98–1.00) and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.91–1.00), respectively, while combined sensitivity was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.37–0.98), 0.82 (95% CI: 0.64–0.92) and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.54–0.91), respectively.ConclusionsAlthough serological methods with a high specificity is essential for potential rapid diagnostic, false-negative results can be obtained in the serum samples, there is no suitable rapid serological test to refer to as is the case with TM infection.

Diagnostic performance of cone beam computed tomography in assessing peri-implant bone loss: A systematic review.

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the assessment of peri-implant bone loss and analyze its influencing factors. Clinical and preclinical studies reporting diagnostic outcomes of CBCT imaging of peri-implant bone loss compared to direct reference measurements were sought by searching five electronic databases, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CINAHL Plus, and OpenGrey. QUADAS-2 criteria were adapted for quality analysis of the included studies. A qualitative synthesis was performed. Two meta-analysis models (random-effects and mixed-effects) summarized the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve observations reported in the selected studies. The mixed-effects meta-analysis model evaluated three possible influencing factors, "defect type," "defect size," and "study effect." The initial search yielded 3,716 titles, from which 18 studies (13 in vitro and 5 animal) were included. Diagnostic accuracy of CBCT was fair to excellent in detecting in vitro circumferential-intrabony and fenestration defects, but moderate to low for peri-implant dehiscences, and tended to be higher for larger defect sizes. Both, over- and underestimation of linear measurements were reported for the animal models. The meta-analyses included 37 AUC observations from eight studies. The random-effects model showed significant heterogeneity. The mixed-effects model exhibited also significant but lower heterogeneity, and "defect type" and "study effect" significantly influenced the variability of AUC observations. In vitro, CBCT performs well in detecting peri-implant circumferential-intrabony or fenestration defects but less in depicting dehiscences. Influencing factors due to other site-related and technical parameters on the diagnostic outcome need to be addressed further in the future studies.

Diagnostic test accuracy of jolt accentuation for headache in acute meningitis in the emergency setting

Background Meningitis is inflammation of the meninges, the layers that protect the brain and spinal cord. Acute meningitis is an emergent disease that develops over the course of hours to several days. Delay in treatment can lead to serious outcomes. Inflammation of the meninges is assessed by analysing cerebrospinal fluid. Identifying the pathogen in cerebrospinal fluid is another way to diagnose meningitis. Cerebrospinal fluid is collected by doing a lumbar puncture, which is an invasive test, and can be avoided if a physical examination excludes the diagnosis of meningitis. However, most physical examinations, such as nuchal rigidity, Kernig's test, and Brudzinski's test, are not sufficiently sensitive to exclude meningitis completely. Jolt accentuation of headache is a new and less well-recognised physical examination, which assesses meningeal irritation. It is judged as positive if the headache is exacerbated by rotating the head horizontally two or three times per second. A 1991 observational study initially reported high sensitivity of this examination to predict pleocytosis. Pleocytosis, an abnormally high cerebrospinal fluid sample white cell count, is an accepted indicator of nervous system infection or inflammation. Jolt accentuation of headache may therefore accurately rule out meningitis without the use of lumbar puncture. However, more recent cross-sectional studies have reported variable diagnostic accuracy. Objectives To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of jolt accentuation of headache for detecting acute meningitis in emergency settings. Secondary objectives: to investigate the sources of heterogeneity, including study population, patient condition, and types of meningitis. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Elsevier) to 27 April 2020. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Ichushi-Web Version 5.0 to 28 April 2020. Selection criteria We included cross-sectional studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of jolt accentuation of headache for people with suspected meningitis in emergency settings. We included participants of any age and any severity of illness. Meningitis should be diagnosed with any reference standard, such as cerebrospinal fluid pleocytosis, proof of causative agents, or autopsy. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently collated study data. We assessed methodological quality of studies using QUADAS-2 criteria. We used a bivariate random-effects model to determine summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity where meta-analysis was possible. We performed sensitivity analyses to validate the robustness of outcomes. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Main results We included nine studies (1161 participants). Five studies included only adults. Four studies included both adults and children; however, the proportion was not reported in three of these studies. The youngest child reported in the studies was aged 13 years. There was no study including only children. The reference standard was pleocytosis in eight studies, and the combination of pleocytosis and increased protein in the cerebrospinal fluid in one study. Two studies also used smear or positive culture of cerebrospinal fluid. Risk of bias and concern about applicability was high in the participant selection domain for all included studies and the consciousness subgroup. Overall, pooled sensitivity was 65.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 37.3 to 85.6), and pooled specificity was 70.4% (95% CI 47.7 to 86.1) (very low-certainty evidence). We established the possibility of heterogeneity from visual inspection of forest plots. However, we were unable to conduct further analysis for study population, types of meningitis, and participants' condition, other than disturbance of consciousness (a secondary outcome). Amongst participants whose consciousness was undisturbed (8 studies, 921 participants), pooled sensitivity and specificity were 75.2% (95% CI 54.3 to 88.6) and 60.8% (95% CI 43.4 to 75.9), respectively (very low-certainty evidence). Authors' conclusions Jolt accentuation for headache may exclude diagnoses of meningitis in emergency settings, but high-quality evidence to support use of this test is lacking. Even where jolt accentuation of headache is negative, there is still the possibility of acute meningitis. This review identified the possibility of heterogeneity. However, factors that contribute to heterogeneity are incompletely understood, and should be considered in future research.

Validity and reliability of clinical prediction rules used to screen for cervical spine injury in alert low-risk patients with blunt trauma to the neck: part 2. A systematic review from the Cervical Assessment and Diagnosis Research Evaluation (CADRE) Collaboration.

To update findings of the 2000-2010 Bone and Joint Decade Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) on the validity and reliability of clinical prediction rules used to screen for cervical spine injury in alert low-risk adult patients with blunt trauma to the neck. We searched four databases from 2005 to 2015. Pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the modified QUADAS-2 and QAREL criteria. We synthesized low risk of bias studies following best evidence synthesis principles. We screened 679 citations; five had a low risk of bias and were included in our synthesis. The sensitivity of the Canadian C-spine rule ranged from 0.90 to 1.00 with negative predictive values ranging from 99 to 100%. Inter-rater reliability of the Canadian C-spine rule varied from k=0.60 between nurses and physicians to k=0.93 among paramedics. The inter-rater reliability of the Nexus Low-Risk Criteria was k=0.53 between resident physicians and faculty physicians. Our review adds new evidence to the Neck Pain Task Force and supports the use of clinical prediction rules in emergency care settings to screen for cervical spine injury in alert low-risk adult patients with blunt trauma to the neck. The Canadian C-spine rule consistently demonstrated excellent sensitivity and negative predictive values. Our review, however, suggests that the reproducibility of the clinical predictions rules varies depending on the examiners level of training and experience.

Impact of partial-volume correction in oncological PET studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PurposePositron-emission tomography can be useful in oncology for diagnosis, (re)staging, determining prognosis, and response assessment. However, partial-volume effects hamper accurate quantification of lesions <2–3× the PET system’s spatial resolution, and the clinical impact of this is not evident. This systematic review provides an up-to-date overview of studies investigating the impact of partial-volume correction (PVC) in oncological PET studies.MethodsWe searched in PubMed and Embase databases according to the PRISMA statement, including studies from inception till May 9, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened all abstracts and eligible full-text articles and performed quality assessment according to QUADAS-2 and QUIPS criteria. For a set of similar diagnostic studies, we statistically pooled the results using bivariate meta-regression.ResultsThirty-one studies were eligible for inclusion. Overall, study quality was good. For diagnosis and nodal staging, PVC yielded a strong trend of increased sensitivity at expense of specificity. Meta-analysis of six studies investigating diagnosis of pulmonary nodules (679 lesions) showed no significant change in diagnostic accuracy after PVC (p = 0.222). Prognostication was not improved for non-small cell lung cancer and esophageal cancer, whereas it did improve for head and neck cancer. Response assessment was not improved by PVC for (locally advanced) breast cancer or rectal cancer, and it worsened in metastatic colorectal cancer.ConclusionsThe accumulated evidence to date does not support routine application of PVC in standard clinical PET practice. Consensus on the preferred PVC methodology in oncological PET should be reached. Partial-volume-corrected data should be used as adjuncts to, but not yet replacement for, uncorrected data.

Diagnostic accuracy of IgG‐specific versus polyspecific enzyme‐linked immunoassays in heparin‐induced thrombocytopenia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Background There are conflicting data on whether the IgG-specific or polyspecific antiplatelet factor 4/heparin (PF4/H) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is preferred for the laboratory diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Objectives To directly compare diagnostic accuracy of IgG-specific versus polyspecific ELISA in HIT. Patients/Methods A systematic search yielded nine studies comprising 1948 patients with suspected HIT tested by both IgG-specific and polyspecific ELISAs and a reference standard against which the diagnostic accuracy of the ELISAs could be measured. Study quality was assessed by QUADAS-2 criteria. Results There was identical sensitivity for IgG-specific and polyspecific ELISAs (0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95-0.99) and superior specificity of IgG-specific compared with polyspecific ELISA (0.87 [0.85-0.88] vs. 0.82 [0.80-0.84], respectively). Performance was similar in subgroups using the serotonin release assay and a single commercial ELISA manufacturer. The negative predictive values of IgG-specific and polyspecific ELISA were similarly high (0.99, [0.99-1.00], but the positive predictive value was superior with IgG-specific compared with polyspecific ELISA (0.56 [0.52-0.61] vs. 0.32 [0.28-0.35], respectively). The positive likelihood ratio (LR) was higher in IgG-specific than polyspecific ELISA, although negative LRs were similar. There was high risk of quality concerns in domains of index test and reference standard. Conclusions The superior diagnostic accuracy of IgG-specific ELISA reinforces the ISTH-SSC recommendation for standardization of laboratory testing for HIT. Likelihood ratios of individual assays may be used in combination with clinical scoring systems as part of an integrated diagnostic algorithm for HIT.

In patients presenting to the emergency department with skin and soft tissue infections what is the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasonography for the diagnosis of abscess compared to the current standard of care? A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectivesThe primary objective of this systematic review was to determine the accuracy of point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) in diagnosing abscess in emergency department (ED) patients with skin and soft tissue infections...

Review article: Diagnostic accuracy of risk stratification tools for patients with chest pain in the rural emergency department: A systematic review.

Risk stratification tools for patients presenting to rural EDs with undifferentiated chest pain enable early definitive treatment in high-risk patients. This systematic review compares the most commonly used risk stratification tools used to predict the risk of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) for patients presenting to rural EDs with chest pain. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and Embase for studies published between January 2011 and January 2015 was undertaken. Study quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 criteria and the PRISMA guidelines.Eleven studies using eight risk stratification tools met the inclusion criteria. The percentage of MACE in the patients stratified as suitable for discharge, and the percentage of patients whose scores would have recommended admission that did not experience a MACE event were used as comparisons. Using the findings of a survey of emergency physicians that found a 1% MACE rate acceptable in discharged patients, the EDACS-ADP was considered the best performer. EDACS-ADP had one of the lowest rates of MACE in those discharged (3/1148, 0.3%) and discharged one of the highest percentage of patients (44.5%). Only the GRACE tool discharged more patients (69% - all patients with scores <100) but had a MACE rate of 0.3% in discharged patients. The HFA/CSANZ guidelines achieved zero cases of MACE but discharged only 1.3% of patients.EDACS-ADP can potentially increase diagnostic efficiency of patients presenting at ED with chest pain. Further assessment of tool in a rural context is recommended.

Diagnostic value of thyroid transcription factor-1 for pleural or other serous metastases of pulmonary adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis.

The role of thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF-1) in the diagnosis of metastatic pulmonary adenocarcinomas in pleural, pericardial, and peritoneal effusions has not been defined. This study aimed to assess the overall diagnostic accuracy of TTF-1 for metastatic pulmonary adenocarcinomas in pleural or other effusions. Literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and other databases to find eligible publications. Quality was assessed according to standardized QUADAS-2 criteria. Sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative likelihood ratio (PLR/NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were used to assess overall performance of the TTF-1 assay. A systematic search revealed 20 studies comprising a total of 1,213 subjects in this meta-analysis. The summary estimates were listed as follows: sensitivity, 0.74 (95% CI: 0.69–0.79); specificity, 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97–1.00); PLR, 78.16 (95% CI: 27.15–225.05); NLR, 0.26 (95% CI: 0.22–0.32); and diagnostic odds ratio, 297.75 (95% CI: 104.16–851.19). Estimated positive and negative post-probability values for metastatic pulmonary adenocarcinomas prevalence of 20% were 95% and 6%, respectively. The area under the SROC curve was 0.96. TTF-1 shows significant potential as a diagnostic marker to differentiate metastatic pulmonary from non-pulmonary adenocarcinomas in pleural or other effusions. These results justify larger, more rigorous studies to confirm such a diagnostic role.

Blood CEA levels for detecting recurrent colorectal cancer.

Testing for carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) in the blood is a recommended part of follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer following primary curative treatment. There is substantial clinical variation in the cut-off level applied to trigger further investigation. To determine the diagnostic performance of different blood CEA levels in identifying people with colorectal cancer recurrence in order to inform clinical practice. We conducted all searches to January 29 2014. We applied no language limits to the searches, and translated non-English manuscripts. We searched for relevant reviews in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, MEDION and DARE databases. We searched for primary studies (including conference abstracts) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Science Citation Index & Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. We identified ongoing studies by searching WHO ICTRP and the ASCO meeting library. We included cross-sectional diagnostic test accuracy studies, cohort studies, and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of post-resection colorectal cancer follow-up that compared CEA to a reference standard. We included studies only if we could extract 2 x 2 accuracy data. We excluded case-control studies, as the ratio of cases to controls is determined by the study design, making the data unsuitable for assessing test accuracy. Two review authors (BDN, IP) assessed the quality of all articles independently, discussing any disagreements. Where we could not reach consensus, a third author (BS) acted as moderator. We assessed methodological quality against QUADAS-2 criteria. We extracted binary diagnostic accuracy data from all included studies as 2 x 2 tables. We conducted a bivariate meta-analysis. We used the xtmelogit command in Stata to produce the pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity and we also produced hierarchical summary ROC plots. In the 52 included studies, sensitivity ranged from 41% to 97% and specificity from 52% to 100%. In the seven studies reporting the impact of applying a threshold of 2.5 µg/L, pooled sensitivity was 82% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78% to 86%) and pooled specificity 80% (95% CI 59% to 92%). In the 23 studies reporting the impact of applying a threshold of 5 µg/L, pooled sensitivity was 71% (95% CI 64% to 76%) and pooled specificity 88% (95% CI 84% to 92%). In the seven studies reporting the impact of applying a threshold of 10 µg/L, pooled sensitivity was 68% (95% CI 53% to 79%) and pooled specificity 97% (95% CI 90% to 99%). CEA is insufficiently sensitive to be used alone, even with a low threshold. It is therefore essential to augment CEA monitoring with another diagnostic modality in order to avoid missed cases. Trying to improve sensitivity by adopting a low threshold is a poor strategy because of the high numbers of false alarms generated. We therefore recommend monitoring for colorectal cancer recurrence with more than one diagnostic modality but applying the highest CEA cut-off assessed (10 µg/L).

A Systematic Review of Symptoms for the Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer.

Ovarian cancer is common and has significant morbidity and mortality, partly because it is often diagnosed at a late stage. This study sought to determine the accuracy of individual symptoms and combinations of symptoms for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. MEDLINE was searched, identifying 2,492 abstracts, reviewing 71 articles in full, and ultimately identifying 17 studies published between 2001 and 2014 that met the inclusion criteria. Data were abstracted by two researchers, and quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria adapted to the study question. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis was used where possible, and heterogeneity and threshold effects were explored using receiver operating characteristic curves. Data were analyzed in 2015. Most studies were at high risk of bias, primarily because of case-control design or differential verification bias. The highest positive likelihood ratios (LRs+) were found for presence of abdominal mass (LR+, 30.0); abdominal distension or increased girth (LR+, 16.0); abdominal or pelvic pain (LR+, 10.4); abdominal or pelvic bloating (LR+, 9.3); loss of appetite (LR+, 9.2); and a family history of ovarian cancer (LR+, 7.5). No symptoms were helpful at ruling out ovarian cancer when absent. The Ovarian Cancer Symptom Index was validated in five studies and (after excluding one outlier with different inclusion criteria) was 63% sensitive and 95% specific (LR+, 12.6; LR-, 0.39). Two other symptom scores had not been validated prospectively. Several individual signs and symptoms significantly increase the likelihood of ovarian cancer when present. More work is needed to validate decision rules and develop new decision support tools integrating risk factors, symptoms, and possibly biomarkers to identify women at increased ovarian cancer risk.

Análisis comparativo de pruebas de tamiz para la detección de problemas en el desarrollo diseñadas y validadas en México

BackgroundIn recent years a number of child development screening tools have been developed in Mexico; however, their properties have not been compared. The objective of this review was to compare the report quality and risk bias of the screening tools developed and validated in Mexico in their published versions. MethodsA search was conducted in databases, gray literature and cross references. The resultant tests were compared and analyzed using STARD, QUADAS and QUADAS-2 criteria. Results“Valoración Neuroconductual del Desarrollo del Lactante” (VANEDELA), “Evaluación del Desarrollo Infantil or EDI” (CDE in English), “Prueba de Tamiz del Neurodesarrollo infantil” (PTNI), “Cartillas de Vigilancia para identificar alteraciones en el Desarrollo del Lactante” (CVDL) and “Indicadores de riesgo del Perfil de Conductas de Desarrollo” (INDIPCD-R) were included for the comparison. No test fulfilled all STARD items. The most complete in their methodological description were VANEDELA and EDI. The areas lacking more data on the reports were recruiting and patient selection (VANEDELA, PTNI, CVDL, INDIPCD-R). In QUADAS evaluation, all had some risk bias, but some serious concerns of risk bias were raised by patient sampling and by the choice of gold standard in two tests (PTNI, INDIPCD-R). ConclusionsChild development screening tests created and validated in Mexico have variable report quality and risk bias. The test with the best validation report quality is VANEDELA and the one with the lowest risk of bias is EDI.

Accuracy of administrative data for surveillance of healthcare-associated infections: a systematic review

ObjectiveMeasuring the incidence of healthcare-associated infections (HAI) is of increasing importance in current healthcare delivery systems. Administrative data algorithms, including (combinations of) diagnosis codes, are commonly used to determine the...

Mini-Cog for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias within a community setting.

Alzheimer's disease and related forms of dementia are becoming increasingly prevalent with the aging of many populations. The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease relies on tests to evaluate cognition and discriminate between individuals with dementia and those without dementia. The Mini-Cog is a brief, cognitive screening test that is frequently used to evaluate cognition in older adults in various settings. The primary objective of this review was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Cog for detecting Alzheimer's disease dementia and related dementias in a community setting.Secondary objectives included investigations of the heterogeneity of test accuracy in the included studies and potential sources of heterogeneity. These potential sources of heterogeneity included the baseline prevalence of dementia in study samples, thresholds used to determine positive test results, the type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease dementia or all causes of dementia), and aspects of study design related to study quality. Overall, the goals of this review were to determine if the Mini-Cog is a cognitive screening test that could be recommended to screen for cognitive impairment in community settings. We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (Ovid SP), Science Citation Index (Web of Science), BIOSIS previews (Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), and the Cochrane Dementia Group's developing register of diagnostic test accuracy studies to March 2013. We used citation tracking (using the database's 'related articles' feature, where available) as an additional search method and contacted authors of eligible studies for unpublished data. We included all cross-sectional studies that utilized the Mini-Cog as an index test for the diagnosis of dementia when compared to a reference standard diagnosis of dementia using standardized dementia diagnostic criteria. For the current review we only included studies that were conducted on samples from community settings, and excluded studies that were conducted in primary care or secondary care settings. We considered studies to be conducted in a community setting where participants were sampled from the general population. Information from studies meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted including information on the characteristics of participants in the studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 criteria and summarized using risk of bias applicability and summary graphs. We extracted information on the diagnostic test accuracy of studies including the sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals of these measures and summarized the findings using forest plots. Study specific sensitivities and specificities were also plotted in receiver operating curve space. Three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1620 participants. The sensitivities of the Mini-Cog in the individual studies were reported as 0.99, 0.76 and 0.99. The specificity of the Mini-Cog varied in the individual studies and was 0.93, 0.89 and 0.83. There was clinical and methodological heterogeneity between the studies which precluded a pooled meta-analysis of the results. Methodological limitations were present in all the studies introducing potential sources of bias, specifically with respect to the methods for participant selection. There are currently few studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy of the Mini-Cog in community settings. The limited number of studies and the methodological limitations that are present in the current studies make it difficult to provide recommendations for or against the use of the Mini-Cog as a cognitive screening test in community settings. Additional well-designed studies comparing the Mini-Cog to other brief cognitive screening tests are required in order to determine the accuracy and utility of the Mini-Cog in community based settings.

Myocardial perfusion MRI compared to fractional flow reserve: a meta-analysis

Methods This meta-analysis was performed in adherence to the PRISMA statement. Two reviewers systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science, using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Only studies using invasive coronary angiography combined with FFR for assessment of intermediate coronary stenoses were included. The QUADAS-2 criteria were applied for quality appraisal. A random-effects model was used for computing pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and the diagnostic odds ratio. Analyses were performed on both vessel and patient levels.

Psychiatric diagnosis by telephone: is it an opportunity?

For reasons of feasibility, diagnostic telephone interviews are frequently used in research of psychiatric morbidity. However, it is unknown whether diagnostic telephone interviews are as valid as diagnostic face-to-face interviews. Are diagnostic telephone interviews for psychiatric disorders as valid as diagnostic face-to-face interviews? A systematic review of original studies in PubMed, PsychINFO and Embase was carried out. We included studies considering (1) the sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic telephone interviews using face-to-face interviews as a golden standard and (2) the agreement between diagnostic telephone and diagnostic face-to-face interviews. Eligible were studies in the general population, in patients at risk for psychiatric disorders and in psychiatric outpatients. We assessed risk of bias with the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS) instrument. We included sixteen studies. The included studies were generally small with thirteen studies reporting about <100 participants. Specificity was generally high in populations with low or intermediate prevalence of psychiatric morbidity. Sensitivity was low in these populations, but slightly higher in samples with more psychiatric disorders. Studies with a higher risk of psychiatric disorders generally reported higher percentages of agreement and higher kappa values. Considering the QUADAS-2 criteria, most studies had a medium or high risk of bias, especially concerning patient selection and unbiased judgement of the test. Of the six studies with a medium or low risk of bias, the three studies assessing current anxiety and depressive disorders yielded kappa values between 0.69 and 0.84, indicating good agreement. There is insufficient evidence that diagnostic telephone interviews for the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders are valid, although results for depression and anxiety disorders seem promising.