Dataset Information

Agreement between gastrointestinal panel testing and standard microbiology methods for detecting pathogens in suspected infectious gastroenteritis: Test evaluation and meta-analysis in the absence of a reference standard.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Multiplex gastrointestinal pathogen panel (GPP) tests simultaneously identify bacterial, viral and parasitic pathogens from the stool samples of patients with suspected infectious gastroenteritis presenting in hospital or the community. We undertook a systematic review to compare the accuracy of GPP tests with standard microbiology techniques.

Review methods

Searches in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane library were undertaken from inception to January 2016. Eligible studies compared GPP tests with standard microbiology techniques in patients with suspected gastroenteritis. Quality assessment of included studies used tailored QUADAS-2. In the absence of a reference standard we analysed test performance taking GPP tests and standard microbiology techniques in turn as the benchmark test, using random effects meta-analysis of proportions.

Results

No study provided an adequate reference standard with which to compare the test accuracy of GPP and conventional tests. Ten studies informed a meta-analysis of positive and negative agreement. Positive agreement across all pathogens was 0.93 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.96) when conventional methods were the benchmark and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.58 to 0.77) when GPP provided the benchmark. Negative agreement was high in both instances due to the high proportion of negative cases. GPP testing produced a greater number of pathogen-positive findings than conventional testing. It is unclear whether these additional 'positives' are clinically important.

Conclusions

GPP testing has the potential to simplify testing and accelerate reporting when compared to conventional microbiology methods. However the impact of GPP testing upon the management, treatment and outcome of patients is poorly understood and further studies are needed to evaluate the health economic impact of GPP testing compared with standard methods. The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO as CRD42016033320.

SUBMITTER: Freeman K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5333893 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Agreement between gastrointestinal panel testing and standard microbiology methods for detecting pathogens in suspected infectious gastroenteritis: Test evaluation and meta-analysis in the absence of a reference standard.

Freeman Karoline K Tsertsvadze Alexander A Taylor-Phillips Sian S McCarthy Noel N Mistry Hema H Manuel Rohini R Mason James J

PloS one 20170302 3

<h4>Objective</h4>Multiplex gastrointestinal pathogen panel (GPP) tests simultaneously identify bacterial, viral and parasitic pathogens from the stool samples of patients with suspected infectious gastroenteritis presenting in hospital or the community. We undertook a systematic review to compare the accuracy of GPP tests with standard microbiology techniques.<h4>Review methods</h4>Searches in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane library were undertaken from inception to January 201 ...[more]

PMID: 28253337

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCorona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently a worldwide pandemic and has a huge impact on public health and socio-economic development. The purpose of this study is to explore the diagnostic value of the quantitative computed tomography (CT) method by using different threshold segmentation techniques to distinguish between patients with or without COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsA total of 47 patients with suspected COVID-19 were retrospectively analyzed, including nine patients with positive real-time fluorescence reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test (confirmed case group) and 38 patients with negative RT-PCR test (excluded case group). An improved 3D convolutional neural network (VB-Net) was used to automatically extract lung lesions. Eight different threshold segmentation methods were used to define the ground glass opacity (GGO) and consolidation. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the performance of various parameters with different thresholds for diagnosing COVID-19 pneumonia.ResultsThe volume of GGO (VOGGO) and GGO percentage in the whole lung (GGOPITWL) were the most effective values for diagnosing COVID-19 at a threshold of - 300 HU, with areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.769 and 0.769, sensitivity of 66.67 and 66.67%, specificity of 94.74 and 86.84%. Compared with VOGGO or GGOPITWL at a threshold of - 300 Hounsfield units (HU), the consolidation percentage in the whole lung (CPITWL) with thresholds at - 400 HU, - 350 HU, and - 250 HU were statistically different. There were statistical differences in the infection volume and percentage of the whole lung, right lung, and lobes between the two groups. VOGGO, GGOPITWL, and volume of consolidation (VOC) were also statistically different at the threshold of - 300 HU.ConclusionsQuantitative CT provides an image quantification method for the auxiliary diagnosis of COVID-19 and is expected to assist in confirming patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in suspected cases.

Dataset Information

Agreement between gastrointestinal panel testing and standard microbiology methods for detecting pathogens in suspected infectious gastroenteritis: Test evaluation and meta-analysis in the absence of a reference standard.

Objective

Review methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Agreement between gastrointestinal panel testing and standard microbiology methods for detecting pathogens in suspected infectious gastroenteritis: Test evaluation and meta-analysis in the absence of a reference standard.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets