Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27017271›Full record

ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2016

NINA-LAMP compared to microscopy, RDT, and nested PCR for the detection of imported malaria.

Abu Naser Mohon, Lydia Da-Yeong Lee, Abebe Genetu Bayih, Asongna Folefoc, Dylan Guelig, Robert A Burton, Paul LaBarre, Wilson Chan, Bonnie Meatherall, Dylan R Pillai

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Trends of neglectedOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Diagnostic Methods for Non-Falciparum Malaria.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Abu Naser MohonDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Disease, University of Calgary, AB, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
Lydia Da-Yeong LeeDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Disease, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
Abebe Genetu BayihDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
Asongna FolefocDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
Dylan GueligPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Robert A BurtonPATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Paul LaBarrePATH, Seattle, WA, USA.
Wilson ChanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.
Bonnie MeatherallDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Dylan R PillaiDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Disease, University of Calgary, AB, Canada; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, AB, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. Electronic address: drpillai@ucalgary.ca.
University of Calgary · CAProgram for Appropriate Technology in Health · US

Funding

CaO-heated DNA amplification obviates electricity requirement at point of careR01EB012641 · NIBIB · PATH · PI BURTON, ROBERT ANDREW · 2011 to 2013
$1.8M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB012641
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microscopy and field adaptable rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are not sensitive and specific in certain conditions such as poor training of microscopists, lack of electricity, or lower sensitivity in the detection of non-falciparum malaria. More sensitive point-of-care testing (POCT) would reduce delays in diagnosis and initiation of therapy. In the current study, we have evaluated the efficacy of noninstrumented nucleic acid amplification (NINA) coupled with loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) for detection of traveler's malaria (n=140) in comparison with microscopy, nested PCR, and the only Food and Drug Administration-approved rapid diagnostic test. NINA-LAMP was 100% sensitive and 98.6% specific when compared to nested PCR. For non-falciparum detection, NINA-LAMP sensitivity was 100% sensitive compared to nested PCR, whereas RDT sensitivity was 71%. LAMP is highly sensitive and specific for symptomatic malaria diagnosis regardless of species.

Indexed as

TravelChromatography, AffinityDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansMalariaMicroscopyMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPoint-of-Care SystemsSensitivity and SpecificityLAMPMalariaPoint of care test

Identifiers

PMID27017271
PMCPMC4862928
OpenAlexW2150420998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.