ArticleBMC infectious diseases2017
Precisão e confiabilidade de um teste imuno-cromatográfico rápido NS1 para diagnóstico DENV-1 no ponto de atendimento e no laboratório.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a Molecular Aptamer Beacon Applied to Magnetic-Assisted RNA Extraction for Detection of Dengue and Zika Viruses Using Clinical Samples.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Dengue fever as a reemerging disease in upper Egypt: Diagnosis, vector surveillance and genetic diversity using RT-LAMP assay.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRapid immunochromatographic tests (ICT) for dengue non-structural protein 1 (NS1) have shown good performance for diagnosing acute-phase dengue in serum in laboratory settings, but rarely have been assessed in whole blood and at point of care (POC). This study compare the accuracy and inter- and intra-observer reliability of the NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT in whole blood at POC versus serum in the laboratory, during a DENV-1 epidemic.
methodsCross-sectional study involving 144 adults spontaneously demanding care in an emergency department within 4 days of onset of acute febrile illness. Accuracy of NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT was compared in whole blood and serum, both at 15 and 30 min, blinded to the reference RT-PCR or NS1 ELISA. Non-dengue patients were also tested for Zika virus with RT-PCR. Reliability of whole blood and serum readings by the same or different observers was measured by simple kappa (95% CI).
resultsAt 15 min, sensitivity (Sn) of NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT in whole blood/POC was 76.7% (95% CI: 68.0-84.1) and specificity (Sp) was 87.0% (95% CI: 66.4-97.2). Sn in serum/laboratory was 82% (95% CI: 74.1-88.6) and Sp 100% (95% CI: 85.8-100). Positive likelihood ratio was 5.9 (95% CI: 2.0-17.0) for whole blood/POC and 19.8 (95% CI: 2.9-135.1) for serum/laboratory. Reliability of matched readings of whole blood/POC and serum/laboratory by the same observer (k = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93) or different observers (k = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.72-0.92) was almost perfect, with higher discordant levels in the absence of dengue. Results did not differ statistically at 5%.
conclusionsNS1 Bioeasy™ ICT in DENV-1 epidemics is a potentially confirmatory test. Invalid results at 15 min should be reread at 30 min. To optimize impact of implementing ICT in the management of false-negatives it should be incorporated into an algorithm according to setting and available specimen.
trial registrationUTN U1111-1145-9451 .
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.