MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403998646 · doi:10.1186/s12936-024-05144-1

Diagnostic accuracy of the point-of-care standard G6PD test™ (SD Biosensor) for glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4403998646 on OpenAlex

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

VenueMalaria Journal · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersUniversidad de AntioquiaMedicines for Malaria VenturePATHBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsGlucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiencyPoint-of-care testingPoint of careMedicineMeta-analysisBiosensorTest (biology)Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenaseParasitologyInternal medicineMedical physicsDehydrogenaseBiologyPathologyBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PDd) is a common genetic enzymopathy that can induce haemolysis triggered by various factors, including some anti-malarial drugs. Although many Point-of-Care (PoC) tests, such as Standard G6PD™ are available to detect G6PDd, its pooled diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) remains unknown. METHODS: To estimate the DTA of StandG6PD-BS at various thresholds of G6PDd, a systematic review with a DTA meta-analysis were conducted, searching EMBASE, MEDLINE, and SciELO databases up to April 4, 2024.The included studies were those that measured G6PD activity using StandG6PD-BS (reference test) and spectrophotometry (gold standard) in patients suspected of having G6PDd. The risk of bias (RoB) of the studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool and the certainty of evidence (CoE) with the GRADE approach. For the estimation of within-study DTA, a random-effect bivariate meta-analysis was performed to determine the pooled sensitivity and specificity for 30%, 70%, and 80% enzyme levels' thresholds, and a graphical analysis of the heterogeneity using crosshair and Confidence Regions on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) space plots. RESULTS: After screening 2496 reports, four studies were included with 7864 participants covering all thresholds. Two studies had high RoB in QUADAS-2 domains 2 and 3, and the others had low RoB, with low, moderate, and high heterogeneity at the 30%, 70%, and 80% thresholds, respectively. The pooled sensitivity was 99.1%, 95.7%, and 90% for 30%, 70%, and 80% thresholds, respectively. The pooled specificity was 97.4%; 92.9%; and 89.0% for 30%, 70%, and 80% thresholds, respectively. CONCLUSION: StandG6PD-BS is a PoC test with high sensitivity and specificity to detect G6PDd at different thresholds.

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)0.002
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.321 · 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