EBM

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harper, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Harper, D.
Topic Collections
Right arrow EBM Diagnosis
Evidence-Based Medicine 2000; 5:186
© 2000 Evidence-Based Medicine

Review: papanicolaou and wet mount smears have low sensitivity but high specificity for detecting vaginal trichomoniasis

Wiese W, Patel SR, Patel SC, et al. A meta-analysis of the Papanicolaou smear and wet mount for the diagnosis of vaginal trichomoniasis. Am J Med 2000 Mar;108:301–8.

QUESTION: In women, what are the sensitivity and specificity of the Papanicolaou (Pap) and wet mount smears for detecting vaginal trichomoniasis?

Data sources
Studies were identified by searching Medline (1976 to February 1998) and reference lists of relevant articles.

Study selection
2 reviewers independently selected studies that described diagnostic tests for vaginal trichomoniasis, used trichomonas culture as the diagnostic standard, and were published in any language.

Data extraction
2 reviewers independently extracted data on study setting and validity of study design and for 2 x 2 contingency tables. The quality of study methods was classified as level I (2 criteria fulfilled), level II (1 criterion fulfilled), or level III (no criteria fulfilled). The following criteria were used: consecutive patients were evaluated prospectively, the test result did not influence the decision to apply the diagnostic test, and the test of interest and the diagnostic standard were blinded and independently examined. Disagreement was resolved by discussion.

Main results
30 studies (31 comparisons, 9501 women) met the selection criteria (level I, 12 studies; level II, 15 studies; and level III, 4 studies). . . . [Full text of this article]

Diane Harper, MD, MSc, MPH

Dartmouth Medical School Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2000 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.