ArticleMalaria journal2016
Detection of Plasmodium using filter paper and nested PCR for patients with malaria in Sanliurfa, in Turkey.
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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Avian Malaria in Penguins: Diagnostics and Future Direction in the Context of Climate Change.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Molecular identification and anti-malarial drug resistance profile of Plasmodium falciparum from patients attending Kisoro Hospital, southwestern Uganda.Malaria journal · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment with Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine in pregnant women in San Pedro, Côte D'Ivoire.Pathogens and global health · 2021Article
- Characteristics of imported Plasmodium ovale spp. and Plasmodium malariae in Hubei Province, China, 2014-2018.Malaria journal · 2020Article
- Article
- Molecular Screening for Malaria among Blood Donors in a WHO Claimed Region of Egypt, Fayoum Governorate.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2017Article
- A Triplex Nested PCR for Diagnosis ofIranian journal of parasitologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this study to detect Plasmodium and a subspecies of Plasmodium using filter paper in malaria endemic province, Sanliurfa, in Turkey, compare the results of nested PCR (nPCR) with microscopy for the diagnosis of malaria and present the epidemiological data of malaria.
methodsThis study was carried out in malaria-endemic Sanliurfa between 2008 and 2011. Finger prick blood samples, thick and thin Giemsa-stained blood smears, were collected from 153 malaria-suspected farmworkers. The Giemsa-stained blood smears were examined microscopically. The obtained DNA products, extracted from blood-spotted filter papers or from the thick blood smears, were analysed by nPCR to amplify the 18S ssrRNA Plasmodium gene with genus and specific primers. The results of the microscopy were compared to the nPCR results.
resultsOf the specimens, 7.2 % were determined as Plasmodium-positive by microscopy, whereas 9.8 % were determined as Plasmodium-positive by nPCR. Of the positive Plasmodium specimens, 93.33 % were identified as P. vivax. Four out of the 15 specimens that were microscopically diagnosed as negative were Plasmodium-positive with nPCR. When compared to the microscopy, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values of the nPCR were determined as 100, 97.2 and 73.3 %, respectively. nPCR was determined to be more sensitive and specific than microscopy.
conclusionsThis study revealed that the accurate diagnosis of malaria by nPCR was compulsory in malaria-endemic Sanliurfa and nPCR should be applied routinely in laboratory studies.
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.