ArticleMalaria journal2015
Surmised total leucocyte counts miscalculate the parasite index of Plasmodium vivax malaria patients of tertiary and primary care settings in South-Western India.
Article in Malaria journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Severe vivax malaria: a prospective exploration at a tertiary healthcare centre in Southwestern India.Pathogens and global health · 2017Article
- Therapeutic Assessment of Primaquine for Radical Cure ofThe Korean journal of parasitology · 2016Observational
- A more appropriate white blood cell count for estimating malaria parasite density in Plasmodium vivax patients in northeastern Myanmar.Acta tropica · 2016Article
- Article
- Therapeutic assessment of chloroquine-primaquine combined regimen in adult cohort of Plasmodium vivax malaria from a tertiary care hospital in southwestern India.Malaria journal · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor the calculation of parasite index (PI) by microscopy method, an assumed total leucocyte count (TLC) of 8,000/μL is used conventionally. However, due to obvious variation in the population and individual TLCs, use of 8,000/μL may result in either over/underestimation of the PI.
methodsThis study was aimed at ascertaining the utility of 8,000/μL TLC, as well as other assumed TLCs, with respect to measured TLC for the calculation of PI. A tertiary care hospital and five primary health centres were the base for the prospective study conducted among microscopically proven, symptomatic Plasmodium vivax mono-infection patients aged ≥18 years. PIs calculated by assumed TLCs ranging from 4,000-11,000/μL were compared with those calculated by measured TLCs. Geometric mean with 95% confidence interval, Bland-Altman plot and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used for statistical analysis.
resultsA total of 284 P. vivax mono-infection patients, including 156 from a tertiary care hospital and 128 from five primary health centres, were recruited in the study. Assumed TLCs below 5,000 cell/μL and above 5,500 cell/μL in tertiary care setting resulted in significant (p <0.05) underestimation and overestimation, respectively. However, in primary health centres, it was an assumed TLC of 5,000 cell/μL, below and above which there was significant (p <0.05) underestimation and overestimation observed, respectively.
conclusionsAssumed TLC of 8,000/μL is not suitable for the calculation of PI. Either actual TLC of the patient should be measured or a representative TLC should be derived for the population under investigation for any study requiring calculated PI by microscopy.
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.