ArticleMalaria journal2014
Estimating malaria parasite density among pregnant women at central Sudan using actual and assumed white blood cell count.
Article in Malaria journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Demographic and socio-economic factors affecting bed net ownership, usage, and malaria transmission among adult patients seeking healthcare in two Ghanaian urban cities.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of malaria among first antenatal care attendees in rural Burkina Faso.Tropical medicine and health · 2022Article
- Epidemiology of malaria among pregnant women during their first antenatal clinic visit in the middle belt of Ghana: a cross sectional study.Malaria journal · 2020Article
- Biochemical and hematological changes among anemic and non-anemic pregnant women attending antenatal clinic at the Bolgatanga regional hospital, Ghana.BMC hematology · 2018Article
- Malaria Parasite Density Estimation using Actual and Assumed White Blood Cells Count in Children in Eastern Sudan.Journal of tropical pediatrics · 2016Article
- A more appropriate white blood cell count for estimating malaria parasite density in Plasmodium vivax patients in northeastern Myanmar.Acta tropica · 2016Article
- Article
- Surmised total leucocyte counts miscalculate the parasite index of Plasmodium vivax malaria patients of tertiary and primary care settings in South-Western India.Malaria journal · 2015Article
- Clinical malaria among pregnant women on combined insecticide treated nets (ITNs) and intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine in Yaounde, Cameroon.BMC women's health · 2014Article
- Assumed white blood cell count of 8,000 cells/μL overestimates malaria parasite density in the Brazilian Amazon.PloS one · 2014Article
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
backgroundMicroscopic examination using Giemsa-stained thick blood films remains the reference standard for detection of malaria parasites and it is the only method that is widely and practically available for quantifying malaria parasite density. There are few published data (there was no study during pregnancy) investigating the parasite density (ratio of counted parasites within a given number of microscopic fields against counted white blood cells (WBCs) using actual number of WBCs.
methodsParasitaemia was estimated using assumed WBCs (8,000), which was compared to parasitaemia calculated based on each woman's WBCs in 98 pregnant women with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria at Medani Maternity Hospital, Central Sudan.
resultsThe geometric mean (SD) of the parasite count was 12,014.6 (9,766.5) and 7,870.8 (19,168.8) ring trophozoites /μl, P <0.001 using the actual and assumed (8,000) WBC count, respectively. The median (range) of the ratio between the two parasitaemias (using assumed/actual WBCs) was 1.5 (0.6-5), i e, parasitaemia calculated assuming WBCs equal to median (range) 1.5 (0.6-5) times higher than parasitaemia calculated using actual WBCs. There were 52 out of 98 patients (53%) with ratio between 0.5 and 1.5. For 21 patients (21%) this ratio was higher than 2, and for five patients (5%) it was higher than 3.
conclusionThe estimated parasite density using actual WBC counts was significantly lower than the parasite density estimated using assumed WBC counts. Therefore, it is recommended to use the patient`s actual WBC count in the estimation of the parasite density.
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.