ArticleClinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology2005
Evaluation and diagnostic usefulness of domestic and imported enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for detection of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 antibody in India.
Article in Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-infection of HIV in patients with Buruli ulcer disease in Central Ghana.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- A High-throughput Bead-based Affinity Assay Enables Analysis of Genital Protein Signatures in Women At Risk of HIV Infection.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2019Article
- Occult HBV Infection in Nigeria.Archives of basic and applied medicine · 2018Article
- Comparative assessment of commercial ELISA kits for detection of HIV in India.BMC research notes · 2014Article
- Article
- Performance and diagnostic usefulness of commercially available enzyme linked immunosorbent assay and rapid kits for detection of HIV, HBV and HCV in India.Virology journal · 2012Article
- Performance characteristics of a new rapid immunochromatographic test for the detection of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) types 1 and 2.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is important for patient management and prevention of new infections. The number of test kits available for the detection of HIV antibodies is unprecedented. In order to identify appropriate test kits, we evaluated a variety of commercial kits manufactured abroad as well as in India. The plasma and serum specimens (n=264) were collected from individuals attending the Voluntary Counseling and Testing Centre at the YRG Centre for AIDS and Education. The specimens were used to evaluate six commercially available HIV test kits: Enzaids HIV 1+2, HIV-CheX, Murex HIV-1.2.0, Genscreen HIV 1/2 version 2, Vironostika HIV Uni-Form II Ag/Ab, and CombAids RS Advantage. High sensitivities and specificities (>or=99%) were observed for the Enzaids, Murex, Vironostika, and CombAids assays. HIV-CheX showed the highest number of false-positive and false-negative results. The Genscreen test also gave many false positives. The study indicated that the Enzaids, Murex, and Vironostika enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits and the CombAids RS Advantage rapid assay could be used to achieve acceptable results for the detection of HIV antibodies. A combination of two tests is recommended to optimize the efficiency of HIV antibody testing algorithms, especially when evaluation with an HIV Western blot confirmatory test is not possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.