Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25510882›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2014

Will a quadruple multiplexed point-of-care screening strategy for HIV-related co-infections be feasible and impact detection of new co-infections in at-risk populations? Results from cross-sectional studies.

Nitika Pant Pai, Rachita Dhurat, Martin Potter, Tarannum Behlim, Geneviève Landry, Caroline Vadnais, Camilla Rodrigues, Lawrence Joseph, Anjali Shetty

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Nitika Pant PaiDepartment of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Division of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Rachita DhuratDepartment of Dermatology, LTM Medical College, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Martin PotterChronic Viral Illness Service, Division of Infectious Disease, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Centre de recherche et d'aide pour narcomanes (CRAN), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Tarannum BehlimDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Geneviève LandryCentre de recherche et d'aide pour narcomanes (CRAN), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Caroline VadnaisDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Camilla RodriguesDivision of Microbiology, P.D. Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Lawrence JosephDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Anjali ShettyDivision of Microbiology, P.D. Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
McGill University Health Centre · CAMcGill University · CANational Hospital · INP. D. Hinduja Hospital and Medical Research Centre · IN

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research HBF 103210
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMultiplexed point-of-care (POC) devices can rapidly screen for HIV-related co-infections (eg, hepatitis C (HCV), hepatitis B (HBV), syphilis) in one patient visit, but global evidence for this approach remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate a multiplex POC testing strategy to expedite screening for HIV-related co-infections in at-risk populations.

methodsA multiplex strategy was developed with two subsequent versions of an investigational device Miriad. It was evaluated in two non-comparable settings and populations in two countries for feasibility of conduct, detection of new infections, preference and accuracy. Version 1 was evaluated in 375 sexually transmitted disease clinic attendees in Mumbai, India; version 2 was evaluated in 119 injection drug users in Montreal, Canada.

resultsFeasibility (completion rate) of the multiplex strategy was high (86.1% Mumbai; 92.4% Montreal). A total of 170 new infections were detected in Mumbai (56 HIV, 75 HBV, 37 syphilis, 2 HCV) versus 2 in Montreal. Preference was 60% in Mumbai and 97% in Montreal. Miriad version 1 specificities were high: HIV 99.7% (98.3% to 100%), HBV 99.3% (97.6% to 99.9%), HCV 99.7% (98.5% to 99.9%), syphilis 85.2% (80.9% to 88.8%); sensitivities were as follows: HIV 100% (94.8% to 100%), HBV 13.3% (6.6% to 23.2%), HCV 50% (1.3% to 98.7%), syphilis 86.1% (70.5% to 95.3%). With version 2, specificities improved: HIV 100% (97.2% to 100%), HBV 100% (97.3% to 100%), HCV 85.3% (73.8% to 93.0%), syphilis 98.1% (93.3% to 99.8%); sensitivities were: HIV 100% (47.3% to 100%), HCV 80.4% (66.1% to 90.6%), syphilis 100% (22.4% to 100%).

conclusionsA quad multiplex POC strategy for HIV and co-infections was feasible to operationalise and preferred by patients in both settings. Many new infections were identified in Mumbai and accuracy improved with version 2 of the assay. Such a strategy will help expedite screening for co-infections, particularly where baseline screening is low. These findings are valuable to practitioners, researchers, policymakers and funders involved in initiatives for all four diseases with implications for scale-up.

Indexed as

AdultCanadaCoinfectionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHepatitis BHepatitis CHIVHIV InfectionsHumansIncidenceIndiaMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID25510882
PMCPMC4267080
OpenAlexW2142516702

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.