ArticlePloS one2020
Comparison of the diagnostic performance of microscopic examination, Copro-ELISA, and Copro-PCR in the diagnosis of Capillaria philippinensis infections.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic relatedness and diversity of Capillaria species infecting bayad (Bagrus bajad) in upper Egypt.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- High Prevalence of Intestinal Capillariasis in Chronic Diarrhea Patients in Thailand: Serological Screening Using a Rapid Lateral-Flow Immunochromatographic Assay.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Semi-Nested PCR Compared with Indirect-ELISA to Diagnose Human Fasciolosis.Iranian journal of public health · 2022Article
- Comparison of polymerase chain reaction and microscopy for the detection ofVeterinary world · 2021Article
- Parasitic Infections of the Gastrointestinal Track and Liver.Gastroenterology clinics of North America · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intestinal capillariasis is a parasitic zoonosis caused by the tiny nematode parasite Capillaria philippinensis. It is a major health problem that may lead to death if not diagnosed and treated appropriately. The difficulties in the diagnosis of C. philippinensis highlight the importance of developing accurate, sensitive, and specific methods for early diagnosis. This study aimed to detect the presence of C. philippinensis infection among 42 clinically suspected patients with certain criteria that are highly suggestive of capillariasis and to compare the diagnostic yield of microscopy, copro-ELISA, and PCR for the detection of copro-DNA. Sociodemographic characteristics and clinical data were also described for the infected group. Out of 42 patients, 10 were microscopically positive, 40 samples were positive by copro-ELISA, nested PCR detected 35 positive cases, with total detection rates of 23.8%, 95.2%, and 83.3% using direct microscopic examination, copro-ELISA, and PCR, respectively. The majority of positive cases were females, middle-aged people, and people from rural areas. The real number of cases infected with C. philippinensis may far exceed those estimated using microscopy. The diagnosis by copro-ELISA for the detection of C. philippinensis coproantigen and by nested PCR to identify parasite DNA revealed a higher number of positive cases. Using ELISA for the detection of coproantigen is a sensitive test that identifies the infection, yet it is not specific. Copro-DNA offers a satisfactory sensitive and specific method for the detection of infection in clinically suspected patients. The most susceptible individuals to C. philippinensis infection are females, middle-aged people, and people of low social standards. Intestinal capillariasis needs to be considered in patients who present with symptoms of chronic diarrhea and hypoalbuminemia because if these cases are left undiagnosed and untreated, they may suffer from lethal complications.
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.