ArticleMalaria journal2016
The diagnostic accuracy of the hand-held Raman spectrometer for the identification of anti-malarial drugs.
Article in Malaria journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discrimination of Falsified Erectile Dysfunction Medicines by Use of an Ultra-Compact Raman Scattering Spectrometer.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Substandard Quality of the Antimicrobials Sold in the Street Markets in Haiti.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Counterfeit and Substandard Test of the Antimalarial Tablet RiametMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Global Pharma Health Fund Minilab™ in Assessing Pharmacopoeial Quality of Antimicrobials.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2018Article
- Field detection devices for screening the quality of medicines: a systematic review.BMJ global health · 2018Article
- Cost savings of paper analytical devices (PADs) to detect substandard and falsified antibiotics: Kenya case study.Medicine access @ point of careArticle
- Quality assessment of DiflucanMedicine access @ point of careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a need for accurate and field-applicable instruments for the evaluation of the quality of anti-malarial drugs. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the NanoRam(®), a handheld Raman spectrometer (RS), to identify anti-malarial drugs.
methodsIn total, 289 anti-malarial drugs collected in a randomized field survey in Gabon were evaluated. The samples were compared with authentic products as supplied by the official manufacturer. To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the handheld NanoRam(®) spectrometer in the identification of anti-malarial drugs, a two-gate reversed-flow design was applied. The standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) were followed. The index test was the handheld RS. The reference test standards were thin layer chromatography and high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet photo diode array detection.
resultsThe sensitivity [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] and specificity of the RS to correctly identify an anti-malarial drug were 100% (95% CI 94.9-100%) and 96% (95% CI 92.3-99.0%), respectively. The RS could not differentiate between different batches of the same product or different manufacturers of the same product. Intra-observer agreement for 289 samples was 100%. The average time to conduct the RS was 15 s per sample compared to 45 min per sample for TLC.
conclusionThe handheld RS holds promise as an easy-to-use, quick and field-applicable instrument for the evaluation of quality of anti-malarial drugs, potentially empowering pharmacists, drug inspectors and medical regulatory authorities. Trial registration NTR4341 (Dutch Trial Registry).
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.