ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
Performance of BinaxNOW for diagnosis of malaria in a U.S. hospital.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Host Plasma Protein Biomarkers for Tuberculosis Disease Screening in Febrile Adults in Tanzania.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Hematology thin smears perform equally to parasitology thick and thin blood smears for the diagnosis ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- False-Positive Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test Likely Due to African Tick Bite Fever: A Case Report.Reports (MDPI) · 2024Article
- Article
- Malaria Surveillance - United States, 2018.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2022Article
- Article
- Advances and challenges in automated malaria diagnosis using digital microscopy imaging with artificial intelligence tools: A review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
- Fever in the Returned Pediatric Traveler.Global pediatric health · 2021Review
- Methanol Fixation, but not Giemsa Staining, Inactivates Ebola and Lassa Viruses in Peripheral Blood Smears Made on Plastic Microscope Slides.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020Article
- Molecular epidemiological surveillance of Africa and Asia imported malaria in Wuhan, Central China: comparison of diagnostic tools during 2011-2018.Malaria journal · 2020Article
- Clinical Impact of Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Testing at a US Children's Hospital.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the sick returned traveler.Seminars in diagnostic pathology · 2019Review
- A Comparison of Optical, Electrochemical, Magnetic, and Colorimetric Point-of-Care Biosensors for Infectious Disease Diagnosis.ACS infectious diseases · 2018Review
- Malaria Diagnostic Practices in U.S. Laboratories in 2017.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- High prevalence of malaria in a non-endemic setting: comparison of diagnostic tools and patient outcome during a four-year survey (2013-2017).Malaria journal · 2018Article
- Photo-based External Quality Assessment of Malaria rapid diagnostic tests in a non-endemic setting.PloS one · 2018Article
- Malaria in Children.Pediatric clinics of North America · 2017Review
- Non-falciparum malaria imported mainly from Africa: a review from a Portuguese hospital.Malaria journal · 2017Article
- NINA-LAMP compared to microscopy, RDT, and nested PCR for the detection of imported malaria.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2016Article
- Chimeric peptide constructs comprising linear B-cell epitopes: application to the serodiagnosis of infectious diseases.Scientific reports · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microscopic diagnosis and species identification of Plasmodium in areas of nonendemicity provide a robust method for malaria diagnosis but are technically challenging. A prospective study was conducted to measure the performance of BinaxNOW compared to microscopy (the gold standard) in a U.S. teaching hospital. Overall, BinaxNOW was 84.2% sensitive and 99.8% specific. Excluding patients on antimalarial therapy, the sensitivity was 92.9%. Importantly, BinaxNOW initially misclassified a case of Plasmodium falciparum malaria as non-falciparum. These results support the judicious use of BinaxNOW in screening of individuals suspected of having malaria in areas of nonendemicity.
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.