ArticlePloS one2017
The performance of BD FACSPresto™ for CD4 T-cell count, CD4% and hemoglobin concentration test in Ethiopia.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of the BD-FACS Presto for CD4 count and hemoglobin measurement in a district hospital and rural laboratory in Ghana.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Reference intervals for CD4 and hemoglobin among apparently healthy pregnant women in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Comparison of Standard and Point-of-Care CD4+ T Lymphocyte Measurement Methods in HIV-1 Infected Turkish Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Reference Intervals for Absolute and Percentage CD4International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Validation of the BD FACSPresto system for the measurement of CD4 T-lymphocytes and hemoglobin concentration in HIV-negative and HIV-positive subjects.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn Ethiopia, CD4+ T-cell counting is still required for all patients at baseline before antiretroviral therapy (ART) and to determine eligibility and follow-up of opportunistic infection prophylaxis. However, access to CD4+ T cell count in rural health facilities remains a major challenge in Ethiopia like other resource-limited settings. METHODOLOGY: Both capillary and venous blood was drawn from each of 325 study participant recruited in Addis Ababa and surroundings. The CD4+ T-cell count, CD4%, and hemoglobin (Hgb) were tested at one of the four study health facilities using capillary blood and BD FACSPresto™ device. These tests were also done at the national HIV reference laboratory, using venous blood with BD FACSCalibur™, Sysmex XT-1800i™, and BD FACSPresto™.
resultsBD FACSPresto™ had an absolute mean bias of -13.3 cells/ul (-2.99%) and 28.3 cells/μl (6.4%) using venous and capillary blood, respectively, compared with BD FACSCalibur™. The absolute CD4 assay on the BD FACSPresto™ had a regression coefficient (R2) of 0.87 and 0.92 using capillary blood and venous blood samples, respectively, compared with BD FACSCalibur™. The percentage similarity of the BD FACSPresto™ using capillary and venous blood was 105.2% and 99.3%, respectively. The sensitivity of the FACSPresto™ using threshold of 500 cells/μl for ART eligibility using capillary and venous blood was 87.9 and 94.3%, while the specificity was 91.4 and 83.8%, respectively. Furthermore, the BD FACSPresto™ had an absolute mean bias of -0.2 dl/μl (0.0%) (95% LOA: -1.7, 1.3) and -0.59 dl/μl (0.1%) (95% LOA: -1.49, 0.31) for Hgb using capillary and venous blood compared with the Sysmex XT-1800i™, respectively.
conclusionOur results showed acceptable agreement between the BD FACSPresto™ and BD FACSCalibur™ for CD4+ T-cell counting and CD4%; and between the BD FACSPresto™ and Sysmex XT-1800i™for measuring Hgb concentration.
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.