According to the World Health Organization (WHO) report on global tuberculosis (TB), TB is one of the most onerous infectious diseases, with 7.1 million people newly diagnosed 1 and 1.5 million people dying from TB in 2019. 2 Furthermore, when this TB pandemic collides with threats such as the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), it will worsen due to the limited access to healthcare. 3,4

Background Legionellosis remains a public health problem. The most common diagnostic method to detect Legionella pneumophila (L. pneumophila) is culture. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a fast and accurate method for this detection in environmental samples. Methods Four databases were searched for studies that evaluated the detection efficiency of PCR in L. pneumophila. The quality evaluation was conducted using Review Manager 5.3. We used Meta-DiSc 1.4 software and the Stata 15.0 software to create forest plots, a meta-regression, a bivariate boxplot and a Deeks’ funnel plot. Results A total of 18 four-fold tables from 16 studies were analysed. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of PCR was 94% and 72%, respectively. The positive likelihood ratio (RLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) was 2.73 and 0.12, respectively. The result of the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 22.85 and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.7884. Conclusion Establishing a laboratory diagnostic tool for L. pneumophila detection is important for epidemiological studies. In this work, PCR demonstrated a promising diagnostic accuracy for L. pneumophila.

Purpose Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the pathogen of coronavirus disease 2019. Diagnostic methods based on the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) have been developed to detect SARS-CoV-2 rapidly. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of CRISPR for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection. Materials and Methods Studies published before August 2021 were retrieved from four databases, using the keywords “SARS-CoV-2” and “CRISPR.” Data were collected from these publications, and the sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted for analysis with MetaDiSc 1.4. The Stata 15.0 software was used to draw Deeks’ funnel plots to evaluate publication bias. Results We performed a pooled analysis of 38 independent studies shown in 30 publications. The reference standard was reverse transcription-quantitative PCR. The results indicated that the sensitivity of CRISPR-based methods for diagnosis was 0.94 (95% CI 0.93–0.95), the specificity was 0.98 (95% CI 0.97–0.99), the PLR was 34.03 (95% CI 20.81–55.66), the NLR was 0.08 (95% CI 0.06–0.10), and the DOR was 575.74 (95% CI 382.36–866.95). The area under the curve was 0.9894. Conclusion Studies indicate that a diagnostic method based on CRISPR has high sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, this would be a potential diagnostic tool to improve the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 detection.