Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29482500›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2018

Evaluation of HIV-1 rapid tests and identification of alternative testing algorithms for use in Uganda.

Pontiano Kaleebu, Paul Kato Kitandwe, Tom Lutalo, Aminah Kigozi, Christine Watera, Mary Bridget Nanteza, Peter Hughes, Joshua Musinguzi, Alex Opio, Robert Downing and 1 more

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Treatment-adjusted prevalence to assess HIV testing programmes.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2021
    Article
  9. 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

11 authors.

Pontiano KaleebuUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda. Pontiano.kaleebu@mrcuganda.org.
Paul Kato KitandweUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.
Tom LutaloUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.
Aminah KigoziUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.
Christine WateraUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.
Mary Bridget NantezaUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.
Peter HughesMRC/UVRI Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.
Joshua MusinguziAIDS Control Programme, Ministry of Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Alex OpioAIDS Control Programme, Ministry of Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Robert DowningUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.
Edward Katongole MbiddeUganda Virus Research Institute, Entebbe, Uganda.

Funding

Provision of Quality Assurance for HIVU2GPS000586 · PS · UGANDA VIRUS RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI WATERA, CHRISTINE · 2006 to 2011
$3.8M
CGH CDC HHS U2G GH000785Medical Research Council MC_UU_00027/1Medical Research Council, United Kingdom MRC/UVRI Core funding 2017NCHHSTP CDC HHS U2G PS000586USA CDC under Cooperative Agreement 5U2GPS000586-05 and 1U2GGH000785-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe World Health Organization recommends that countries conduct two phase evaluations of HIV rapid tests (RTs) in order to come up with the best algorithms. In this report, we present the first ever such evaluation in Uganda, involving both blood and oral based RTs. The role of weak positive (WP) bands on the accuracy of the individual RT and on the algorithms was also investigated.

methodsIn total 11 blood based and 3 oral transudate kits were evaluated. All together 2746 participants from seven sites, covering the four different regions of Uganda participated. Two enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) run in parallel were used as the gold standard. The performance and cost of the different algorithms was calculated, with a pre-determined price cut-off of either cheaper or within 20% price of the current algorithm of Determine + Statpak + Unigold. In the second phase, the three best algorithms selected in phase I were used at the point of care for purposes of quality control using finger stick whole blood.

resultsWe identified three algorithms; Determine + SD Bioline + Statpak; Determine + Statpak + SD Bioline, both with the same sensitivity and specificity of 99.2% and 99.1% respectively and Determine + Statpak + Insti, with sensitivity and specificity of 99.1% and 99% respectively as having performed better and met the cost requirements. There were 15 other algorithms that performed better than the current one but rated more than the 20% price. None of the 3 oral mucosal transudate kits were suitable for inclusion in an algorithm because of their low sensitivities. Band intensity affected the performance of individual RTs but not the final algorithms.

conclusionWe have come up with three algorithms we recommend for public or Government procurement based on accuracy and cost. In case one algorithm is preferred, we recommend to replace Unigold, the current tie breaker with SD Bioline. We further recommend that all the 18 algorithms that have shown better performance than the current one are made available to the private sector where cost may not be a limiting factor.

Indexed as

Reagent Kits, DiagnosticAdultAlgorithmsFemaleHIV-1HIV InfectionsHumansImmunoenzyme TechniquesMaleMass ScreeningPoint-of-Care SystemsPredictive Value of TestsSensitivity and SpecificityUgandaReagent Kits, DiagnosticAlgorithmsEvaluationHIV-1Rapid testsUgandaWeak bands

Identifiers

PMID29482500
PMCPMC6389083

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.