ArticleMalaria journal2020
Stratifying malaria receptivity in Bangladesh using archived rapid diagnostic tests.
Article in Malaria journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- How radical is radical cure? Site-specific biases in clinical trials underestimate the effect of radical cure on Plasmodium vivax hypnozoites.Malaria journal · 2021Trial
- Malaria in Bangladesh, 2000-2025: Navigating the Headwinds From Control to Elimination.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Bridging the Gap from Molecular Surveillance to Programmatic Decisions for Malaria Control and Elimination.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Review
- Assessing receptivity to malaria using case surveillance and forest data in a near-elimination setting in northeast Thailand.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- A Global Health Reciprocal Innovation grant programme: 5-year review with lessons learnt.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Precarity at the Margins of Malaria Control in the Chittagong Hill Tracts in Bangladesh: A Mixed-Methods Study.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSurveillance of low-density infections and of exposure to vectors is crucial to understand where malaria elimination might be feasible, and where the risk of outbreaks is high. Archived rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), used by national malaria control and elimination programs for clinical diagnosis, present a valuable, yet rarely used resource for in-depth studies on malaria epidemiology.
methods1022 RDTs from two sub-Districts in Bangladesh (Alikadam and Kamalganj) were screened by qPCR for low-density Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax infections, and by ELISA for Anopheles salivary gland antibodies as a marker for exposure to vectors.
resultsConcordance between RDT and qPCR was moderate. qPCR detected 31/1022 infections compared to 36/1022 diagnosed by RDT. Exposure to Anopheles was significantly higher in Kamalganj despite low transmission, which could be explained by low bed net use.
conclusionsArchived RDTs present a valuable source of antibodies for serological studies on exposure to vectors. In contrast, the benefit of screening archived RDTs to obtain a better estimate of clinical case numbers is moderate. Kamalganj could be prone to 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.