Dataset Information

A systematic review of the screening accuracy of the HIV Dementia Scale and International HIV Dementia Scale.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) and International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) are brief tools that have been developed to screen for and aid diagnosis of HIV-associated dementia (HAD). They are increasingly being used in clinical practice for minor neurocognitive disorder (MND) as well as HAD, despite uncertainty about their accuracy. METHODS AND FINDINGS:A systematic review of the accuracy of the HDS and IHDS was conducted. Studies were assessed on Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy criteria. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR) and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) were calculated for each scale as a test for HAD or MND. We retrieved 15 studies of the HDS, 10 of the IHDS, and 1 of both scales. Thirteen studies of the HDS were conducted in North America, and 7 of the IHDS studies were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Estimates of accuracy were highly heterogeneous between studies for the HDS but less so for the IHDS. Pooled DOR for the HDS was 7.52 (95% confidence interval 3.75-15.11), sensitivity and specificity for HAD were estimated at 68.1% and 77.9%, and sensitivity and specificity for MND were estimated at 42.0% and 91.2%. Pooled DOR for the IHDS was 3.49 (2.12-5.73), sensitivity and specificity for HAD were 74.3% and 54.7%, and sensitivity and specificity for MND were 64.3% and 66.0%. CONCLUSION:Both scales were low in accuracy. The literature is limited by the lack of a gold standard, and variation in estimates of accuracy is likely to be due to differences in reference standard. There is a lack of studies comparing both scales, and they have been studied in different populations, but the IHDS may be less specific than the HDS. These rapid tests are not recommended for diagnostic use, and further research is required to inform their use in asymptomatic screening.

SUBMITTER: Haddow LJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3628906 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A systematic review of the screening accuracy of the HIV Dementia Scale and International HIV Dementia Scale.

Haddow Lewis John LJ Floyd Sian S Copas Andrew A Gilson Richard John Cary RJ

PloS one 20130416 4

<h4>Background</h4>The HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) and International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) are brief tools that have been developed to screen for and aid diagnosis of HIV-associated dementia (HAD). They are increasingly being used in clinical practice for minor neurocognitive disorder (MND) as well as HAD, despite uncertainty about their accuracy.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>A systematic review of the accuracy of the HDS and IHDS was conducted. Studies were assessed on Standards for Reporting D ...[more]

PMID: 23613945

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) are widely present among people living with HIV. Especially its milder forms, asymptomatic neurocognitive impairment (ANI) and mild neurocognitive disorder (MND), remain highly prevalent worldwide. Diagnosing these conditions is subject to a time and resource consuming neuropsychological assessment. Selecting patients at a higher risk of cognitive impairment by using a simple but effective screening tool helps to organise access to further neuropsychological diagnosis. The International HIV Dementia Scale (IHDS) has until now been a well-established screening tool in African and American countries, however these populations' demographics defer significantly from ours, so using the same parameters could be ineffective.ObjectivesTo calculate the prevalence of this condition among people attending an HIV outpatient clinic in Berlin and to validate the use of the IHDS as a screening tool for HAND in a German-speaking population.MethodsWe screened 480 HIV-infected patients using the IHDS, 89% of them were on a stable antiretroviral treatment. Ninety of them completed a standardised neuropsychological battery of tests and a specific cognitive complaints questionnaire. The same procedure was applied to a control group of 30 HIV-negative participants. HAND diagnosis was established according to the Frascati criteria.ResultsThe overall prevalence of HAND in our cohort was 43% (20% ANI, 17% MND and 6% HIV-associated dementia). The optimal cut-off on the IHDS for detecting HAND cases was set at 11 and achieved both a sensitivity and a specificity of 80%. When specifically screening for the more severe form of HAND, HIV-associated dementia, a cut-off value of 10 offered an increase in both sensitivity (94%) and specificity (86%). The Youden Index for diagnostic accuracy was 0.6 and 0.8, respectively.ConclusionsThe prevalence of HAND was comparable to the reported by recent studies performed in countries with a similar economic development. The study confirms the IHDS to be a useful HAND screening tool in primary care settings and establishes new recommendations for its use in German-speaking countries.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2014, the Public Health Agency of Canada estimated that 21% of the people living with HIV in Canada were unaware of their infection. Increased screening and testing for HIV is crucial to reducing the number of undiagnosed infections. To ensure the best use of available resources, it is important to determine the optimal intervals for HIV screening and testing.ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review of the recommendations for the frequency of HIV screening and testing in different populations.MethodsTo identify eligible guidelines, a comprehensive two-tiered search strategy of journals and websites of governments and non-governmental organizations and a three-tiered screening strategy (title, abstract and full content screen) were used. Guidelines were eligible for inclusion if they, a) were published between 2000 and 2015 in English or French, and b) provided guidance on HIV screening/testing intervals for at least one population.ResultsOf the 609 documents retrieved from the search, 34 guidelines met the eligibility criteria. The most frequently mentioned populations were pregnant women, men who have sex with men (MSM) and the general population. Overall, there was consensus on at least annual testing for MSM, intravenous drug users, individuals with HIV-positive sex partners, individuals with multiple partners, sex workers and their clients, migrants from HIV-endemic countries and indigenous peoples. Of the 20 guidelines that provided recommendations for pregnant women, the most common recommendation (n=9) was to test as early as possible during each pregnancy; four guidelines recommended screening during the first prenatal visit; three recommended routine HIV testing; and four suggested retesting in the third trimester regardless of maternal risk of HIV infection. Consensus on HIV testing of the general public, incarcerated people and individuals diagnosed with other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) was lacking. Four guidelines cited a lack of data for not providing specific recommendations in the general population.ConclusionsAdditional evidence is needed to refine the recommendations for pregnant women and inform the optimal timing of HIV testing, especially in the general population, individuals diagnosed with other STIs and incarcerated people.

Project description:IntroductionAs the population ages, Alzheimer's disease and other subtypes of dementia are becoming increasingly prevalent. However, in recent years, diagnosis has often been delayed or not made at all. Thus, improving the rate of diagnosis has become an integral part of national dementia strategies. Although screening for dementia remains controversial, the case is strong for screening for dementia and other forms of cognitive impairment in hospital inpatients. For this reason, the objective of this systematic review was to provide clinicians, who wish to implement screening, an up-to-date choice of cognitive tests with the most extensive evidence base for the use in elective hospital inpatients.MethodsFor this systematic review, PubMed, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library were searched by using a multi-concept search strategy. The databases were accessed on April 10, 2019. All cross-sectional studies that utilized brief, multi-domain cognitive tests as index test and a reference standard diagnosis of dementia or mild cognitive impairment as comparator were included. Only studies conducted in the hospital setting, sampling from unselected, elective inpatients older than 64 were considered.ResultsSix studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2112 participants. Diagnostic accuracy data for the Six-Item Cognitive Impairment Test, Cognitive Performance Scale, Clock-Drawing Test, Mini-Mental Status Examination, and Time & Change test were extracted and descriptively analyzed. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity between the studies precluded performing a meta-analysis.DiscussionThis review found only a small number of instruments and was not able to recommend a single best instrument for use in a hospital setting. Although it was not possible to estimate the pooled operating characteristics, the included description of instrument characteristics, the descriptive analysis of performance measures, and the critical evaluation of the reporting studies may contribute to clinician's choice of the screening instrument that fits best their purpose.

Project description:BackgroundThis systematic review assessed the effectiveness of universal screening for newborn eye abnormalities compared with no screening in improving infant vision and health outcomes.MethodsWe searched CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Global Index Medicus, clinical trials databases, and bibliographies of relevant articles. We included randomized and observational studies of all newborns, regardless of illness or risk factors, that compared universal screening for any eye abnormality by eight weeks of age with no universal screening. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We also reviewed available recommendations on newborn eye screening.ResultsFourteen studies were identified but only three compared universal red reflex screening with no screening. Findings suggest that universal red reflex testing in maternity wards (MWs) may increase the number of newborns with congenital cataracts referred for eye care from MWs or well-baby clinics (WBCs) in the first year of life (risk ratio (RR) = 9.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.36-71.20; low certainty evidence). However, the effect of screening in WBC is uncertain (RR = 6.62, 95% CI = 0.87-50.09). The effect of MW or WBC screening on referral from any health care facility (MWs, WBCs, paediatrician clinic, other) in the first year is uncertain (MW screening: RR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.63-2.39; WBC screening: RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.46-2.05). However, referral or surgery by 6 weeks of age may be higher with universal MW screening (early referral: RR = 4.61, 95% CI = 1.12-19.01; early surgery: RR = 8.23, 95% CI = 1.13-59.80; low certainty evidence). The effect of WBC screening on early referral and surgery is uncertain (early referral: RR = 1.98, 95% CI = 0.43-9.19; early surgery: RR = 3.97, 95% CI = 0.50-31.33; very low certainty evidence). Universal red reflex testing may increase clinical conjunctivitis (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.01-1.47; low certainty evidence) but the effect on confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis is uncertain (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.76-1.90; very low-certainty evidence). Nine guidelines recommended universal newborn eye screening using red reflex testing.ConclusionsEvidence supports the role of red reflex testing shortly after birth to increase early identification, referral, and surgery for congenital cataracts.

Project description:BackgroundRobust diagnosis of dementia requires an understanding of the accuracy of the available diagnostic tests. Informant questionnaires are frequently used to assess for dementia in clinical practice. Recent systematic reviews have sought to establish the diagnostic test accuracy of various dementia informant screening tools. However, most reviews to date have focused on a single diagnostic tool and this does not address which tool is 'best'. A key aim of the overview of systematic reviews is to present a disparate evidence base in a single, easy to access platform.MethodsWe will conduct an overview of systematic reviews in which we 'review the systematic reviews' of diagnostic test accuracy studies evaluating informant questionnaires for dementia. As an overview of systematic reviews of test accuracy is a relatively novel approach, we will use this review to explore methods for visual representation of complex data, for highlighting evidence gaps and for indirect comparative analyses. We will create a list of informant tools by consulting with dementia experts. We will search 6 databases (EMBASE (OVID); Health and Psychosocial Instruments (OVID); Medline (OVID); CINAHL (EBSCO); PSYCHinfo (EBSCO) and the PROSPERO registry of review protocols) to identify systematic reviews that describe the diagnostic test accuracy of informant questionnaires for dementia. We will assess review quality using the AMSTAR-2 (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) and assess reporting quality using PRISMA-DTA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies) checklists. We will collate the identified reviews to create an 'evidence map' that highlights where evidence does and does not exist in relation to informant questionnaires. We will pool sensitivity and specificity data via meta-analysis to generate a diagnostic test accuracy summary statistic for each informant questionnaire. If data allow, we will perform a statistical comparison of the diagnostic test accuracy of each informant questionnaire using a network approach.DiscussionOur overview of systematic reviews will provide a concise summary of the diagnostic test accuracy of informant tools and highlight areas where evidence is currently lacking in this regard. It will also apply network meta-analysis techniques to a new area.

Dataset Information

A systematic review of the screening accuracy of the HIV Dementia Scale and International HIV Dementia Scale.

Publications

A systematic review of the screening accuracy of the HIV Dementia Scale and International HIV Dementia Scale.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets