Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 356

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnostic accuracy of adenosine deaminase in tuberculous pleurisy: A meta-analysis

Open access
Liang, Qiu-Li, Shi, Huan-Zhong, Wang, Ke, Qin, Shou-Ming, Qin, Xue-Jun·2008·Respiratory Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND Conventional tests are not always helpful in making a diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy. Many studies have investigated the usefulness of adenosine deaminase (ADA) in pleural fluid for the early diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the accuracy of ADA measurements in the diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy. METHODS After a systematic review of English language studies, sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy of ADA concentration in the diagnosis of pleural effusion were pooled using random effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance. RESULTS Sixty-three studies met our inclusion criteria. The summary estimates for ADA in the diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy in the studies included were sensitivity 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.90-0.93), specificity 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.89-0.91), positive likelihood ratio 9.03 (95% confidence interval 7.19-11.35), negative likelihood ratio 0.10 (95% confidence interval 0.07-0.14), and diagnostic odds ratio 110.08 (95% confidence interval 69.96-173.20). CONCLUSIONS ADA determination is a relative sensitive and specific test for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy. Measurement of ADA in pleural effusion is thus likely to be a useful diagnostic tool for tuberculous pleurisy. The results of ADA assays should be interpreted in parallel with clinical findings and the results of conventional tests.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rmed.2007.12.007

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 356

Metadata

Authors
Liang, Q.-L., Shi, H.-Z., Wang, K., Qin, S.-M., & Qin, X.-J.
Venue
Respiratory Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-05
Volume
102
Issue
5
Pages
744-754
ISSN
0954-6111 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2156562932
Cited by
356
References
5
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diagnostic accuracy of adenosine deaminase in tuberculous pleurisy: A meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rmed.2007.12.007
The paper
Liang, Q.-L., Shi, H.-Z., Wang, K., Qin, S.-M., & Qin, X.-J. (2008). Diagnostic accuracy of adenosine deaminase in tuberculous pleurisy: A meta-analysis. Respiratory Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2007.12.007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.