MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390986040 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofae020

Diagnostic Accuracy of Computer-Aided Detection During Active Case Finding for Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4390986040 on OpenAlex
Alex Scott, Tahlia Perumal, Ameer Hohlfeld, Suzette Oelofse, Louié Kühn, Jeremi Swanepoel, Coralie Geric, Faiz Ahmad Khan, Aliasgar Esmail, Eleanor Ochodo, Mark E. Engel, Keertan Dheda

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMedical Research CouncilDivision of Research Capacity DevelopmentHarry Crossley FoundationSouth African Medical Research Council
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary tuberculosisMeta-analysisTuberculosisCase findingDiagnostic accuracyIntensive care medicineMedical physicsPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Computer-aided detection (CAD) may be a useful screening tool for tuberculosis (TB). However, there are limited data about its utility in active case finding (ACF) in a community-based setting, and particularly in an HIV-endemic setting where performance may be compromised. Methods: We performed a systematic review and evaluated articles published between January 2012 and February 2023 that included CAD as a screening tool to detect pulmonary TB against a microbiological reference standard (sputum culture and/or nucleic acid amplification test [NAAT]). We collected and summarized data on study characteristics and diagnostic accuracy measures. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality against Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 criteria. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines were followed. Results: Of 1748 articles reviewed, 5 met with the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. A meta-analysis revealed pooled sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78-0.96) and specificity of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.55-0.93), just below the World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended target product profile (TPP) for a screening test (sensitivity ≥0.90 and specificity ≥0.70). We found a high risk of bias and applicability concerns across all studies. Subgroup analyses, including the impact of HIV and previous TB, were not possible due to the nature of the reporting within the included studies. Conclusions: This review provides evidence, specifically in the context of ACF, for CAD as a potentially useful and cost-effective screening tool for TB in a resource-poor HIV-endemic African setting. However, given methodological concerns, caution is required with regards to applicability and generalizability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it