Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21810743›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2011

Evaluation of a newly developed lateral flow immunoassay for the diagnosis of cryptococcosis.

Mark D Lindsley, Nanthawan Mekha, Henry C Baggett, Yupha Surinthong, Rinrapas Autthateinchai, Pongpun Sawatwong, Julie R Harris, Benjamin J Park, Tom Chiller, S Arunmozhi Balajee and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

90 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 219 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. IDCases · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Pulmonary Cryptococcosis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Biosensors and Diagnostics for Fungal Detection.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mark D LindsleyMycotic Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA.
Nanthawan Mekha
Henry C Baggett
Yupha Surinthong
Rinrapas Autthateinchai
Pongpun Sawatwong
Julie R Harris
Benjamin J Park
Tom Chiller
S Arunmozhi Balajee
Natteewan Poonwan
Ministry of Public Health · THCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCryptococcosis is a common opportunistic infection of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals mostly occurring in resource-limited countries. This study compares the performance of a recently developed lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) to blood culture and enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the diagnosis of cryptococcosis.

methodsArchived sera from 704 HIV-infected patients hospitalized for acute respiratory illness in Thailand were tested for cryptococcal antigenemia using EIA. All EIA-positive and a subset of EIA-negative sera were tested by LFA, with results recorded after 5 and 15 minutes incubation. Urine from patients with LFA- and EIA-positive sera was tested by LFA. Antigen results from patients with positive cryptococcal blood cultures were compared.

resultsOf 704 sera, 92 (13%) were positive by EIA; among the 91 EIA-positive sera tested by LFA, 82 (90%) and 87 (96%) were LFA positive when read after 5 and 15 minutes, respectively. Kappa agreement of EIA and LFA for sera was 0.923 after 5 minutes and 0.959 after 15 minutes, respectively. Two of 373 EIA-negative sera were LFA positive at both time points. Of 74 urine specimens from EIA-positive patients, 52 (70.3%) were LFA positive. EIA was positive in 16 of 17 sera from blood culture-positive patients (94% sensitivity), and all sera were positive by LFA (100% sensitivity).

conclusionsA high level of agreement was shown between LFA and EIA testing of serum. The LFA is a rapid, easy-to-perform assay that does not require refrigeration, demonstrating its potential usefulness as a point-of-care assay for diagnosis of cryptococcosis in resource-limited countries.

Indexed as

AIDS-Related Opportunistic InfectionsAntigens, FungalCryptococcosisHIV InfectionsHumansImmunoassaySensitivity and SpecificityAntigens, Fungal

Identifiers

PMID21810743
PMCPMC3148258
OpenAlexW2119878310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.