ArticleJournal of virological methods2010
Performance of HSV-2 type specific serological tests in men in Kenya.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Disclosure of HSV-2 serological test results in the context of an adolescent HIV prevention trial in Kenya.Sexually transmitted infections · 2015Trial
- Using biomarkers to assess the validity of sexual behavior reporting across interview modes among young women in Kampala, Uganda.Studies in family planning · 2014Trial
- Validation of rapid point-of-care tests for herpes simplex virus-type 2 in rural Tanzania.International journal of STD & AIDS · 2025Article
- Article
- An Assessment of Risk Factors for Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2 Infection in Malawian Women Using 2 Classifications for the HerpeSelect 2 Test.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2020Article
- Article
- Seroprevalence of Herpes Simplex Virus type-2 (HSV-2) among pregnant women who participated in a national HIV surveillance activity in Haiti.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Article
- Computational sensing of herpes simplex virus using a cost-effective on-chip microscope.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Current Concepts for Genital Herpes Simplex Virus Infection: Diagnostics and Pathogenesis of Genital Tract Shedding.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2016Review
- Prevalence and incidence estimation of HSV-2 by two IgG ELISA methods among South African women at high risk of HIV.PloS one · 2015Article
- Use of HIV and HSV-2 biomarkers in sub-saharan adolescent prevention research: a comparison of two approaches.The journal of primary prevention · 2014Article
- Light microscopy, culture, molecular, and serologic methods for detection of herpes simplex virus.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Review
- Performance of the Focus HerpeSelect-2 enzyme immunoassay for the detection of herpes simplex virus type 2 antibodies in seven African countries.Sexually transmitted infections · 2011Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This study compared five serological tests with Western blot from University of Washington to determine the most accurate method for detecting antibodies to herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) in a male population in Kisumu, Kenya. A random sample of 250 fishermen from 18 beaches along Lake Victoria underwent serological testing by two generations of the HerpeSelect HSV-2 ELISA ("Focus Gen 1" and "Focus Gen 2"), Kalon HSV-2 ELISA ("Kalon"), Biokit HSV-2 Rapid Test ("Biokit"), and HerpeSelect Express Rapid HSV-2 ("Express") against the Western blot test ("WB") as the "gold standard". Sensitivity and specificity of tests in this population with a high prevalence of HSV-2 (58% by WB) were: Focus Gen 1: 98.6% and 63.5%; Focus Gen 2: 99.3% and 52.3%; Biokit: 66% and 90.9%; Express: 99.3% and 44.3% and Kalon: 98.6% and 85.7%. Increasing the positive cut-off value improved the specificity of the Focus Gen 2-84.9% and Kalon to 92.2%. Focus Gen 2 offered no improvement in specificity over that of Focus Gen 1. Neither rapid assay could be recommended as either a stand-alone assay or as a confirmatory test. The results of Kalon using a cut-off of 1.5 were the most concordant with those of WB for all the approaches tested. However, low positive Kalon test results should be interpreted with caution as they could reflect early seroconversion or false positive results.
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.