ArticleParasitology research2016
Highly specific detection of Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts in human stool samples by undemanding and inexpensive phase contrast microscopy.
Article in Parasitology research, 2016. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis and control of cryptosporidiosis in farm animals.Journal of parasitic diseases : official organ of the Indian Society for Parasitology · 2022Review
- Molecular characterization of Giardia intestinalis and Cryptosporidium parvum from calves with diarrhoea in Austria and evaluation of point-of-care tests.Comparative immunology, microbiology and infectious diseases · 2019Article
- An overview of methods/techniques for the detection of Cryptosporidium in food samples.Parasitology research · 2018Review
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare phase contrast microscopy (PCM) of unstained slides for the detection of Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts with a commercially available enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the detection of cryptosporidial antigen in human stool samples, we prospectively analysed by both methods 463 fresh human stool samples obtained from diarrhoeic patients between July and October 2014. Compared with the EIA, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of PCM were 88.9 % (95 % confidence interval (CI), 66.0-98.1 %), 100 % (95 % CI, 99.0-100 %), 100 % (95 % CI, 77.3-100 %) and 99.6 % (95 % CI, 98.3-100 %), respectively. Additionally, we retrospectively examined with PCM 65 fixed stool samples that had been collected in 2010 from mostly asymptomatic Rwandan children <5 years of age; 14 of these samples had previously yielded positive results with a highly sensitive real-time (RT)-PCR. PCM detected cryptosporidia in 5/14 RT-PCR-positive samples, and notably, also in one of 51 RT-PCR-negative samples, which was subsequently confirmed by acid-fast staining. Positive and negative percent agreement of PCM with RT-PCR were 35.7 % (95 % CI, 16.2-61.4 %) and 98.0 % (95 % CI, 88.7-100 %), respectively. Positive PCM results were associated with higher RT-PCR cycle threshold values (p = 0.044). In conclusion, PCM offers a highly specific, undemanding and inexpensive method for the laboratory diagnosis of acute human cryptosporidiosis independent of the causative Cryptosporidium species.
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.