ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2015
Evaluation of a PfHRP-2 based rapid diagnostic test versus microscopy method among HIV-positive and unknown serology patients in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- PERSISTENCE OF PLASMODIUMAnnals of Ibadan postgraduate medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Evaluation of standard diagnostic rapid test kits for malaria diagnosis among HIV patients in Kano, Nigeria.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the performance of a malaria rapid diagnostic test (RDT; Malaria Quick Test(®); Cypress Diagnostic) compared with the standard thick-smear microscopy method using blood samples from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals and individuals of unknown HIV status collected in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Our results show that 42.1% of 114 HIV-infected patients were concordantly RDT- and thick smear-positive, and 55.3% were concordantly negative. Sensitivity and specificity of the RDT test were 100.0% and 95.4%, respectively, with 5.9% false-positive results and a total agreement of 97.4%; 127 patients with unknown HIV serology were analyzed; of them, 40.9% were RDT- and thick smear-positive, and 46.4% concordantly negative. Sensitivity and specificity were 100.0% and 78.6%, respectively, with 23.5% false-positive results and a total agreement of 87.4%. Malaria Quick Test(®) is rapid and effective for the diagnosis of malaria and has a high sensitivity, confirming its use in general and HIV patients in particular.
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.