Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPormohammad, A
dc.contributor.authorRiahi, SM
dc.contributor.authorNasiri, MJ
dc.contributor.authorFallah, F
dc.contributor.authorAghazadeh, M
dc.contributor.authorDoustdar, F
dc.contributor.authorPouriran, R
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-26T05:01:14Z
dc.date.available2018-08-26T05:01:14Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.tbzmed.ac.ir:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/39015
dc.description.abstractThe measurement of adenosine deaminase (ADA) level in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) has generated as a suitable test for tuberculous meningitis (TBM) diagnosis. The main objective in the present meta-analysis focused on analyzing the ADA test accuracy in order to diagnose TBM.We searched several databases including Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases to identify studies addressing the diagnosis of TBM. The quality of included reports were assessed by RevMan5 software (via QUADS2 checklist). Accuracy measures of ADA test (sensitivity, specificity and others) pooled with random effects models. In addition, the data was elicited by using midas and metan packages in stata (version 12).Twenty studies were eligible for inclusion within the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for TBM diagnosis hallmarks were 89% (95% CI: 0.84-0.92) and 91% (95% CI: 0.87-0.93), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 9.4 (95% CI: 7-12.8), negative likelihood ratio was 0.12 (95% CI: 0.09-0.17), and diagnostic odds ratio was 77 (95% CI: 45-132). Indeed, the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) was 0.96.It was magnificently attained that ADA test had a relatively high accuracy for TBM diagnosis.
dc.language.isoEnglish
dc.relation.ispartofThe Journal of infection
dc.subjectAdenosine Deaminase
dc.subjectClinical Enzyme Tests
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectOdds Ratio
dc.subjectROC Curve
dc.subjectSensitivity and Specificity
dc.subjectTuberculosis, Meningeal
dc.titleDiagnostic test accuracy of adenosine deaminase for tuberculous meningitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
dc.typearticle
dc.citation.volume74
dc.citation.issue6
dc.citation.spage545
dc.citation.epage554
dc.citation.indexPubmed
dc.identifier.DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2017.02.012


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record