ArticleBMC research notes2017
Diagnostic accuracy of VIKIA® Rota-Adeno and Premier™ Rotaclone® tests for the detection of rotavirus in Niger.
Article in BMC research notes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of the indigenous rotavirus vaccine Rotavac in the Universal Immunization Program in India during 2016-2020.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Development and Evaluation of a Nanoparticle-Based Immunoassay for Rotavirus Detection: A Suitable Alternative to ELISA and PCR in Low-Income Setting.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Retrospective analysis on confirmation rates for referred positive rotavirus samples in England, 2016 to 2017: implications for diagnosis and surveillance.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2020Article
- Accuracy and Cross-Reactivity of Rapid Diagnostic Tests for Norovirus and Rotavirus in a Real Clinical Setting.Infection & chemotherapy · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the performance of a multiplex reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction kit as a potential diagnostic and surveillance kit for rotavirus in Kenya.Tropical diseases, travel medicine and vaccines · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe conducted a parallel evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of VIKIA® Rota-Adeno, a rapid diagnostic test (RDT) and Premier™ Rotaclone® an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as the reference standard. The study was part of a rotavirus surveillance project in Niger.
resultsThe sensitivity of both tests was 80.7%. After exclusion of one indeterminate result by visual reading, the specificity of the Premier™ Rotaclone® was 100% by visual or optical density readings and that of VIKIA® Rota-Adeno test was 95.5%. Inter-reader agreement was excellent for both tests (kappa = 1). Our results showed almost similar performance of the EIA and RDT when compared to RT-PCR. Hence, the VIKIA® Rota-Adeno could be a good alternative for use in peripheral health centres where laboratory capacity is limited.
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.