Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Validation Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

[Validity of three methods for inmuno-diagnostic of neurocysticercosis: systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis 1960-2014].

INTRODUCTION: The screening of neurocysticercosis is complex and immunological methods have varying validity.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of ELISA for antigen and antibody, and EITB for antibody in the screening of neurocysticercosis.

METHODS: Meta-analysis of diagnostic tests with an ex-ante protocol implemented in five databases with 15 search strategies, ensuring reproducibility in the selection and extraction of information. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios (LR), diagnostic odds ratio and ROC curve were estimated in MetaDiSc, and predictive values, and Youden index were estimated in Epidat.

RESULTS: EITB presented sensitivity of 85.7% (95% CI 83.5-87.7), specificity 93.9% (95% CI = 92.7-95.0), PLR 19.6 (95% CI = 8,6-44.6), NLR 0.16 (95% CI = 0.12-0.21), OR diagnostic 136.2 (95% CI = 54.7-342.6) and area under the curve 0.926. In ELISA for antibody sensitivity was 87.5% (95% CI = 86.1-88.8), specificity 92.2% (95% CI = 91.4-93.0), PLR 11.3 (95% CI = 8.45-15.11), NLR 0.15 (95% CI = 0.13-0.18), diagnostic OR 87.4 (95% CI = 60.1-127.1) and area under the curve 0.950. ELISA for antigen showed low diagnostic validity. No differences were found in these parameters by sample, antigen or antibody type.

CONCLUSION: ELISA for antibodies and EITB have a similar diagnostic value, detection of serum and CSF showed a similar validity.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app