{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["14"],"submitter":["Zhou G"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Objectives</h4> We aimed to evaluate the indeterminate rate of interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) in the detection of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). <h4>Methods</h4> On 15 November 2022, we searched the PubMed® (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Embase® (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Cochrane Library databases in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators independently extracted the study data and assessed their quality using a modified quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (i.e., QUADAS-2) tool. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled results. <h4>Results</h4> We included 403 studies involving 486,886 individuals and found that the pooled "],"journal":["Frontiers in immunology"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC10225525"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"pubmed_title":["Indeterminate results of interferon gamma release assays in the screening of latent tuberculosis infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis"],"pmcid":["PMC10225525"],"pubmed_authors":["Xia Y","Li H","Luo Q","Cai S","He J","Guo X","Zhang Y","Song C","Zhou G","Chen H","Luo S","Zhou Y"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Indeterminate results of interferon gamma release assays in the screening of latent tuberculosis infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis","description":"<h4>Objectives</h4> We aimed to evaluate the indeterminate rate of interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) in the detection of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). <h4>Methods</h4> On 15 November 2022, we searched the PubMed® (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Embase® (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Cochrane Library databases in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators independently extracted the study data and assessed their quality using a modified quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (i.e., QUADAS-2) tool. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled results. <h4>Results</h4> We included 403 studies involving 486,886 individuals and found that the pooled ","dates":{"release":"2023-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2023 Jan","modification":"2025-04-19T02:37:29.942Z","creation":"2025-04-19T02:37:29.942Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC10225525","cross_references":{}}