Title
Rapid diagnostic test for antenatal syphilis screening in low-income and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Date Issued
01 February 2018
Access level
open access
Resource Type
journal article
Author(s)
National Institute for Science and Technology on Innovation on Diseases of Neglected Populations
Publisher(s)
BMJ Publishing Group
Abstract
To 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. Methods Five 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. Results The 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. Conclusions This 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 number CRD42016036335.
Volume
8
Issue
2
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Obstetricia, GinecologĂa
Salud pĂºblica, Salud ambiental
Subjects
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-85052844318
PubMed ID
Source
BMJ Open
ISSN of the container
20446055
Sponsor(s)
Funding Funding was provided by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Ministry of Science, Technology, Innovation and Communication (no. 573642/2008-7; Ministry of Education/CAPES (no. 573642/2008-7); Research Foundation of the State of Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ) (no. 573642/2008-7) and Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing interests None declared. Patient consent Not applicable.
1Centro de Desenvolvimento TecnolĂ³gico em SaĂºde (CDTS), FundaĂ§Ă£o Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 2National Institute for Science and Technology on Innovation on Diseases of Neglected Populations (INCT/IDPN), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Brazil 3School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK 4Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas (INI), FundaĂ§Ă£o Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 5Instituto de SaĂºde Coletiva, Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Sources of information:
Directorio de ProducciĂ³n CientĂfica
Scopus