ArticleMalaria research and treatment2018
Evaluation of Routine Microscopy Performance for Malaria Diagnosis at Three Different Health Centers in Brazzaville, Republic of Congo.
Article in Malaria research and treatment, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Quality Control of Microscopic Diagnosis of Malaria in Healthcare Facilities and Submicroscopic Infections in Mossendjo, the Department of Niari, the Republic of the Congo.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Malaria diagnostic methods with the elimination goal in view.Parasitology research · 2022Review
- Mentorship on malaria microscopy diagnostic service in Ethiopia: baseline competency of microscopists and performance of health facilities.Malaria journal · 2021Article
- Implementation of external quality assessment of microscopy for improved parasite detection and confirmatory diagnosis of malaria in Tanzanian Military health facilities.BMC research notes · 2020Article
- Artemether-Lumefantrine Efficacy for the Treatment of UncomplicatedThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020Article
- Variation of prevalence of malaria, parasite density and the multiplicity of Plasmodium falciparum infection throughout the year at three different health centers in Brazzaville, Republic of Congo.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Republic of Congo, malaria diagnosis still widely relies on microscopy. We aimed to evaluate the performance of routine microscopy for malaria diagnosis at three different health centers in Brazzaville.
methodsA total of 259, 416, and 131 patients with clinical signs of uncomplicated malaria were enrolled at the Hôpital de Mfilou, Centre de Santé Intégré "Maman Mboualé," and Laboratoire National de Santé Publique, respectively. Two thick blood smears were prepared for each patient, the first being examined by routine microscopists and the second by expert.
resultsAt the Hôpital de Mfilou, sensitivity was 62.1% and specificity was 67.3%. Positive and negative predictive values were 55.6% and 72.9%, respectively. At the Centre de Santé Intégré "Maman Mboualé," sensitivity was 94.2% and specificity was 33.6%. Positive and negative predictive values were 50% and 89.1%, respectively. At the Laboratoire National de Santé Publique, sensitivity and specificity were high with 91.7% and 94.9%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 64.7% and 99.1%, respectively.
conclusionThe performance of routine malaria microscopy in Brazzaville remains inaccurate with large variations among different health centers. Therefore, repeated training including supervision and evaluation would improve routine malaria diagnosis for better management of malaria in Brazzaville, the Republic of Congo.
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.