Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15103552›Full record

ArticleParasitology research2004

Application and assessment of a dipstick assay in the diagnosis of hydatidosis and trichinosis.

Maged M Al-Sherbiny, Abd-Al Magid M K Farrag, Mohamed H Fayad, Mohamed K Makled, Gihan M Tawfeek, Nehad M S Ali

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Parasitology research, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Immunological diagnosis of human hydatid cyst using Western immunoblotting technique.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2016
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Evaluation of immunochromatographic test for the detection of antibodies against Echinococcosis granulosus.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2015
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Diagnosis of parasitic diseases: old and new approaches.Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases · 2009
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maged M Al-SherbinyDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, 12311, Cairo, Egypt. maged123@link.net
Abd-Al Magid M K Farrag
Mohamed H Fayad
Mohamed K Makled
Gihan M Tawfeek
Nehad M S Ali
Ain Shams University · EGCairo University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present work was to apply and evaluate a dipstick assay for the serodiagnosis of human hydatidosis as well as human and experimental trichinosis using camel hydatid cyst fluid (HCF) and Trichinella spiralis muscle larval (TSML) antigens, respectively, and compare this to enzyme-linked immunoelectrotransfer blot (EITB) and Falcon assay screening test-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (FAST-ELISA). Sera samples were collected from patients with confirmed hydatidosis and trichinosis and with other parasitic diseases as well as from normal healthy individuals. Also, sera samples were collected from mice experimentally infected with T. spiralis which were sacrificed at different time points post-infection (PI). HCF and TSML antigens were used in EITB after separation and characterization of their antigenic components using 5-22.5% sodium dodecyl sulphate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis under non-reducing condition. For the diagnosis of hydatidosis, the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of the dipstick assay and EITB were 100, 91.4 and 95.1% while those of FAST-ELISA were 96.2, 100 and 98.4%, respectively. For the diagnosis of human trichinosis, the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of the dipstick assay and EITB were 100% while those of FAST-ELISA were 85.7%. FAST-ELISA proved to be more sensitive in the early diagnosis of experimental T. spiralis infection (100% sensitivity from the second week PI) than the dipstick and EITB (100% sensitivity from the third week PI). All tests retained their sensitivity till the 12th week PI. Since the dipstick assay is extremely easy to perform with a visually interpreted result within 15 min, in addition to being both sensitive and specific, the test could be an acceptable alternative for use in clinical laboratories lacking specialized equipment and the technological expertise needed for EITB and FAST-ELISA.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAnimalsAntibodies, HelminthBlotting, WesternChildChild, PreschoolEchinococcosisEchinococcusEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleHumansMaleMiceMiddle AgedAntibodies, HelminthReagent Strips

Identifiers

PMID15103552
OpenAlexW1997079272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.