Comparison of two published systematic reviews regarding point-of-care tests (POCTs) for detection of Neisseria gonorrhoeae
| Review #1 (Watchirs-Smith et al)17 | Review #2 (Herbst de Cortina et al)18 | |
| Focus | POCTs for NG (operational characteristics and performance) | POCT diagnostics for NG, CT, TV (performance, cost analyses acceptability and feasibility trials, proof of concept) |
| Language | English only | English only |
| Time | Prior to August 2010 | January 2010 to August 2015 |
| Search | PubMed, Embase | PubMed |
| Search terms | ‘rapid test’, or ‘POC test’, or ‘POCT’ or ‘LE’ or ‘urine dipstick’, AND ‘Gonococcal’, or ‘gonorrhoea’, or ‘N gonorrhoeae’ AND ‘evaluation’ or ‘performance characteristics’ or ‘validation’ or ‘performance’ or ‘sensitivity’ or ‘specificity’ | Sexually transmitted diseases or sexually transmitted infection* and (chlamydia or gonorrh* or trichom*)) and (point-of-care and (rapid test or diagnostic or screening or test)) |
| Papers: yield/included | 100/14 | 61/33 |
| Papers with NG focus | 14 | 4 |
CT, Chlamydia trachomatis; NG, Neisseria gonorrhoeae; TV, Trichomonas vaginalis.