Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28872271›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the International AIDS Society2017

To err is human, to correct is public health: a systematic review examining poor quality testing and misdiagnosis of HIV status.

Cheryl C Johnson, Virginia Fonner, Anita Sands, Nathan Ford, Carla Mahklouf Obermeyer, Sharon Tsui, Vincent Wong, Rachel Baggaley

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Cheryl C JohnsonDepartment of HIV, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Virginia FonnerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Anita SandsDepartment of Essential Medicines and Health Products, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Nathan FordDepartment of HIV, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Carla Mahklouf ObermeyerDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Sharon TsuiDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Vincent WongUS Agency for International Development, Washington, DC, USA.
Rachel BaggaleyDepartment of HIV, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
World Health Organization · CHAmerican University of Beirut · LBJohns Hopkins University · USMedical University of South Carolina · USUnited States Agency for International Development · US

Funding

Testing and Counseling for HIV: A Multi-Site StudyR01HD053268 · NICHD · WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION · PI OBERMEYER, CARLA M · 2006 to 2010
$2.2M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD053268the US National Institutes of Health NIH; 5 R01 HD053268World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn accordance with global testing and treatment targets, many countries are seeking ways to reach the "90-90-90" goals, starting with diagnosing 90% of all people with HIV. Quality HIV testing services are needed to enable people with HIV to be diagnosed and linked to treatment as early as possible. It is essential that opportunities to reach people with undiagnosed HIV are not missed, diagnoses are correct and HIV-negative individuals are not inadvertently initiated on life-long treatment. We conducted this systematic review to assess the magnitude of misdiagnosis and to describe poor HIV testing practices using rapid diagnostic tests.

methodsWe systematically searched peer-reviewed articles, abstracts and grey literature published from 1 January 1990 to 19 April 2017. Studies were included if they used at least two rapid diagnostic tests and reported on HIV misdiagnosis, factors related to potential misdiagnosis or described quality issues and errors related to HIV testing.

resultsSixty-four studies were included in this review. A small proportion of false positive (median 3.1%, interquartile range (IQR): 0.4-5.2%) and false negative (median: 0.4%, IQR: 0-3.9%) diagnoses were identified. Suboptimal testing strategies were the most common factor in studies reporting misdiagnoses, particularly false positive diagnoses due to using a "tiebreaker" test to resolve discrepant test results. A substantial proportion of false negative diagnoses were related to retesting among people on antiretroviral therapy.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ErrorsDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHIV InfectionsHumansPublic HealthSensitivity and Specificitydiagnostic errorfalse positivehealthcareHIVHIV testingmisclassificationmisdiagnosispatient safety

Identifiers

PMID28872271
PMCPMC5625583
OpenAlexW2751481303

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.