ArticleThe Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases
Diagnostic parameters and reliability of four rapid immunochromatographic tests for dengue 4.
Article in The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis on the accuracy of rapid immunochromatographic tests for dengue diagnosis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of clinical and virological features in pediatric and adult dengue cases at Insein General Hospital during Myanmar's 2022 dengue season.Tropical medicine and health · 2025Article
- Dengue: A review of laboratory diagnostics in the vaccine age.Journal of medical microbiology · 2024Review
- Componential usage patterns in dengue 4 viruses reveal their better evolutionary adaptation to humans.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
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
backgroundAlthough performance of rapid immunochromatographic tests (RITs) for dengue virus (DENV) serotypes 1, 2 and 3 is relatively settled, evidence on accuracy of RITs for DENV-4 are based on studies with small sample sizes and with discrepant results.
objectivesTo assess accuracy and inter-observer agreement of RITs targeting dengue nonstructural protein-1 (NS1) antigen - Dengue NS1-Bioeasy™, Dengue NS1 Ag Strip-Bio-Rad™, IVB Dengue Ag NS1-Orangelife™ and Dengue NS1-K130-Bioclin™ in DENV-4 samples.
methodsStudy sample (n = 324) included adults presenting at an emergency unit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, with fever of ≤72 h and two or more dengue symptoms. A serum sample from each patient was tested by each RIT. A positive reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction was considered as the reference standard for dengue diagnosis. The diagnostic parameters analyzed for each RIT were sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios. Each RIT was read by homogeneous (two junior nurses) or heterogeneous (one junior nurse and one senior biologist) pairs. Agreement was estimated by simple kappa with 95% confidence interval, positive (Ppos) and negative (Pneg) proportion concordance and prevalence and bias adjusted kappa, rated from poor (k < 0.0) to almost perfect (0.8 < k < 1.0), and perfect (k = 1).
resultsNS1 RITs for DENV-4 diagnosis showed high specificity (95.9%-99.4%), but low sensitivity (14.7%-45.4%). Bioeasy™ had the best performance, with a positive likelihood ratio of 26.0 (95% CI: 8.4;81.0). Inter-observer agreement was almost perfect for all evaluated RITs. Mismatches in confirmed dengue were more common for the Bioclin™ (Ppos 88.3-90.0 %) and Orangelife™ (Ppos 91.7-94.1 %) tests.
conclusionsFor DENV-4, the tested RITs had high specificity, but lower sensitivity compared to published results for other serotypes. They should not be used for screening purposes. Different brands may have very different performances. This should be considered upon deciding of using RITs in DENV-4 outbreaks.
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.