Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28855305›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2017

Field Evaluation of Performance of Alere and Cepheid Qualitative HIV Assays for Pediatric Point-of-Care Testing in an Academic Hospital in Soweto, South Africa.

Tanya Y Murray, Gayle G Sherman, Firdose Nakwa, William B MacLeod, Nosisa Sipambo, Sithembiso Velaphi, Sergio Carmona

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Significant Patient Impact Observed Upon Implementation of Point-of-Care Early Infant Diagnosis Technologies in an Observational Study in Malawi.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2018
    Observational
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Tanya Y MurrayWits Health Consortium, Johannesburg, South Africa tanya.murray@nhls.ac.za.
Gayle G ShermanWits Health Consortium, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Firdose NakwaDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
William B MacLeodDepartment of Global Health and Center for Global Health and Development, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Nosisa SipamboDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Sithembiso VelaphiDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Sergio CarmonaNational Health Laboratory Service, Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-6792-4748
University of the Witwatersrand · ZANational Health Laboratory Service · ZAAfrica Health Research Institute · ZABoston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Point-of-care (POC) technologies for HIV diagnosis in infants have the potential to overcome logistical challenges that delay treatment initiation and prevent improvements in morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of two POC technologies against the current standard-of-care (SOC) laboratory-based assay in South Africa, when operated by nurses in a hospital environment. Children <18 months of age who were treatment naive (excluding prophylaxis) and in whom an HIV PCR test was indicated were eligible for the study. To increase the rate of enrollment of HIV PCR-positive children, HIV-exposed neonates at high risk of mother-to-child transmission and children requiring confirmatory HIV testing were preferentially enrolled. The two POC technologies demonstrated excellent concordance, with 315 (97.8%) results consistent with the SOC result. The POC technologies yielded 102 positive and 220 negative tests each. The SOC assay had 101 positive, 214 negative, 4 indeterminate, 1 invalid, and 2 specimen-rejected results. To include the indeterminate results in sensitivity/specificity calculations, a sensitivity analysis was performed, which yielded a simulated sensitivity of 0.9904 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.9808 to 0.9904) and a specificity of 0.9954 (IQR, 0.9954 to 1.0). This study confirmed that both POC technologies can be successfully used outside the laboratory environment to yield precise sensitivity/specificity values for pediatric, including neonatal, HIV testing.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care TestingDiagnostic Tests, RoutineFemaleHIV InfectionsHospitals, UniversityHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMalePregnancyProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificitySouth Africaearly infant diagnosispediatric HIVpoint of care

Identifiers

PMID28855305
PMCPMC5654906
OpenAlexW2751630530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.