Skip to main content
Advertisement

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Study flow chart.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Main characteristics of the study sets included in the analysis.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Risk of bias and applicability concerns summary.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Risk of bias and applicability concerns graph.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Forest plot showing the accuracy of the molecular techniques according to the single study sets.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Accuracy of all PCR techniques (comparison with both fecal and serological tests): ROC curve.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 2.

Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy of PCR techniques for the diagnosis of Strongyloides stercoralis infection.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 6.

Accuracy of real-time PCR (comparison with fecal tests): ROC curve.

Of note, the only study using a CRS (including serology) to assess the accuracy of real-time PCR demonstrated a sensitivity of 56.8%[20], which is almost the same value found with the meta-analysis. On the other hand, the only study using a Bayesian approach [11] demonstrated an extremely low sensitivity (11.6%) of real-time PCR.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 3.

Summary of findings table for the review of PCR techniques for the diagnosis of Strongyloides stercoralis infection.

More »

Table 3 Expand