Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31929706›Full record

ArticleJournal of laboratory physicians

Evaluation of screening effectiveness of hepatitis B surface antigen and anti-HCV rapid test kits in Pakistan.

Usman Waheed, Yetmgeta Eyayou Abdella, Noor E Saba, Muhammad Arshad, Akhlaaq Wazeer, Ahmad Farooq, Javaid Usman, Abida Arshad, Hasan Abbas Zaheer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of laboratory physicians. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

9 authors.

Usman WaheedSafe Blood Transfusion Programme, Ministry of National Health Services, Government of Pakistan, PIMS, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Yetmgeta Eyayou AbdellaWorld Health Organization's Regional Office for Eastern Mediterranean, Cairo, Egypt.
Noor E SabaPeshawar Regional Blood Centre, Department of Health, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
Muhammad ArshadDepartment of Biological Sciences, International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Akhlaaq WazeerDepartment of Biological Sciences, International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Ahmad FarooqDepartment of Biological Sciences, International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan.
Javaid UsmanDepartment of Pathology, Army Medical College, Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
Abida ArshadDepartment of Biology, PMAS Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
Hasan Abbas ZaheerSafe Blood Transfusion Programme, Ministry of National Health Services, Government of Pakistan, PIMS, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe current study was conducted to evaluate the performance and screening effectiveness of commercially available rapid screening kits in comparison with chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis single-center, cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Pathology and Blood Transfusion Services, Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University, PIMS, Islamabad, from January to April 2019. A total of 10 commercially available immunochromatographic test (ICT) devices and one CLIA kit (LIAISON XL) were tested for their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy using 100 positive and 100 negative samples each for HBV and HCV, respectively.

resultsThe sensitivities and specificities of ICT kits for hepatitis B surface antigen were 65% and 70% (Hightop), 67% and 85% (RightSign), 62% and 73% (Wondfo), 70% and 80% (Accu-Chek), 68% and 77% (Fastep), 73% and 85% (Abon), 77% and 83% (ImmuMed), 80% and 90% (Insta-Answer), 67% and 81% (BioCheck), and 72% and 83% CTK Biotech, respectively. Similarly, the sensitivities and specificities of different ICT kits for HCV were 69% and 80% (Hightop), 76% and 83% (RightSign), 69% and 81% (Wondfo), 78% and 79% (Accu-Check), 68% and 68% (Fastep), 63% and 73% (Abon), 71% and 70% (ImmuMed), 79% and 68% (Insta-Answer), 62% and 66% (BioChek), and 69% and 78% CTK Biotech, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of Diasorin Liaison Murex assay for both HBV and HCV were found to be 100% when compared with PCR. The PPV, NPV and Accuracy were determined accordingly.

conclusionRapid testing ICT devices for both HBV and HCV available in Pakistan were found to have a variable degree of sensitivity and specificity when compared with CLIA and PCR. Comparatively expensive but quality methods are more reliable as compared to rapid devices.

Indexed as

Blood banksHBVHCVPakistanScreening

Identifiers

PMID31929706
PMCPMC6943868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.