ArticleThe American journal of the medical sciences2013
Serologic screening for herpes simplex virus type 2 in persons with human immunodeficiency virus.
Article in The American journal of the medical sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the HerpeSelect Express rapid test in the detection of herpes simplex virus type 2 antibodies in patients with genital ulcer disease.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2015Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Screening for subclinical herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) may be a useful adjunct in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) care. However, HSV-2 serological tests have been suggested to perform less well in HIV-infected populations. In this study, HerpeSelect HSV-2 ELISA was compared with the Sure-Vue Rapid HSV-2 Test for HSV-2 screening of sera from 310 HIV-infected persons receiving care at an HIV-dedicated clinic in the Southeastern United States. In the study, assay agreement and whether the performance of both tests, rather than 1 test alone, would improve screening accuracy were determined. Overall percent test agreement was 96%. Negative percent agreement was best at a HerpeSelect index value <0.90 and positive percent agreement was best at a HerpeSelect index value ≥3.0 (97% and 100%, respectively). Using the manufacturer's established cutoffs for a HerpeSelect positive test result versus negative test result, discordant results between assays occurred in 4% of the cases, and the majority of these cases occurred when the HerpeSelect index value was between 0.9 and 2.9. These data suggest a good correlation between the HerpeSelect and the Sure-Vue HSV-2 Rapid Test in a U.S. HIV-infected population and suggest that confirmatory testing may not help in HSV-2 diagnosis except in cases where HerpeSelect index values are between 0.9 and 3.0.
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.