Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32933094›Full record

ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Analytical and Clinical Assessment of a Portable, Isothermal Recombinase Polymerase Amplification (RPA) Assay for the Molecular Diagnosis of Urogenital Schistosomiasis.

John Archer, Rebecca Barksby, Tom Pennance, Penelope Rostron, Faki Bakar, Stefanie Knopp, Fiona Allan, Fatma Kabole, Said M Ali, Shaali M Ame and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

12 authors.

John ArcherWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.
Rebecca BarksbyFaculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK.
Tom PennanceWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4898-462X
Penelope RostronWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.
Faki BakarPublic Health Laboratory-Ivo de Carneri, P.O. Box 122, Chake-Chake, Pemba, Tanzania.
Stefanie KnoppWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.
Fiona AllanWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.
Fatma KaboleZanzibar Neglected Diseases Programme, Ministry of Health, P.O. Box 236, Zanzibar Town, Unguja, Tanzania.
Said M AliPublic Health Laboratory-Ivo de Carneri, P.O. Box 122, Chake-Chake, Pemba, Tanzania.
Shaali M AmePublic Health Laboratory-Ivo de Carneri, P.O. Box 122, Chake-Chake, Pemba, Tanzania.
David RollinsonWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1999-1716
Bonnie L WebsterWolfson Wellcome Biomedical Laboratories, Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0930-9314

Funding

London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) masters project funds NANatural History Museum Life Sciences Department Investment Funds (DIF) NAPRIMA award from the Swiss National Science Foundation PR00P3_179753Royal Society Research Grant RG160395University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc. for the Schistosomiasis Consortium for Operational Research and Evaluation (SCORE) projects (https://score.uga.edu) awarded bUniversity of Georgia Research Foundation Inc. for the Schistosomiasis Consortium f Prime award: 50816/ sub-award: RR-374-053/4893206
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate diagnosis of urogenital schistosomiasis is crucial for disease surveillance and control. Routine diagnostic methods, however, lack sensitivity when assessing patients with low levels of infection still able to maintain pathogen transmission. Therefore, there is a need for highly sensitive diagnostic tools that can be used at the point-of-care in endemic areas. Recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) is a rapid and sensitive diagnostic tool that has been used to diagnose several pathogens at the point-of-care. Here, the analytical performance of a previously developed RPA assay (RT-ShDra1-RPA) targeting the

Indexed as

AnimalsDNAFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesPoint-of-Care SystemsPredictive Value of TestsRecombinasesReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSchistosoma haematobiumSchistosomiasis haematobiaSensitivity and SpecificityUrineUrogenital SystemDNARecombinasescontroldiagnosiseliminationpoint-of-carerecombinase polymerase amplification (RPA)Schistosoma haematobium (S. haematobium)surveillanceurogenital schistosomiasis

Identifiers

PMID32933094
PMCPMC7570534

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.