ArticleMalaria journal2021
Performance evaluation of the highly sensitive histidine-rich protein 2 rapid test for plasmodium falciparum malaria in North-West Tanzania.
Article in Malaria journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Assessing field performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic tests for malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Malaria journal · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Low practical knowledge but high willingness to use malaria rapid diagnostic tests among healthcare workers in the Republic of Congo.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Diagnostic challenges in malaria detection: A comparative diagnostic performance of HRP2-based rapid diagnostic tests, microscopy, and PCR at Bichena primary hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.Parasite epidemiology and control · 2026Article
- Insights into Malaria and HIV Co-infection: Trends and Impact in Sub-Saharan Africa.Current HIV research · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Comparison of three rapid diagnostic tests for Plasmodium falciparum diagnosis in Ghana.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- A combined superiority and non-inferiority procedure for comparing predictive values of two diagnostic tests.Journal of applied statistics · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the performance of advantage P.f. malaria CardParasites & vectors · 2023Article
- Diagnostic performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic test for the detection of Plasmodium falciparum infections in asymptomatic individuals in Kisangani, Northeast Democratic Republic of Congo.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Malaria rapid diagnostic tests reliably detect asymptomatic Plasmodium falciparum infections in school-aged children that are infectious to mosquitoes.Parasites & vectors · 2023Article
- Malaria amongst children under five in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review of prevalence, risk factors and preventive interventions.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Article
- Performance and utility of more highly sensitive malaria rapid diagnostic tests.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Assessing Asymptomatic Malaria Carriage ofChildren (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Tests: Literary Review and Recommendation for a Quality Assurance, Quality Control Algorithm.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrecise detection of Plasmodium infections in community surveys is essential for effective malaria control. Microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are the major techniques used to identify malaria infections in the field-based surveys. Although microscopy is still considered as the gold standard, RDTs are increasingly becoming versatile due to their rapid and adequate performance characteristics.
methodsA malaria prevalence cross-sectional survey was carried out in north-western Tanzania in 2016, aimed at appraising the performance of high sensitivity Plasmodium falciparum (HSPf) tests compared to SD Bioline Pf and microscopy in detecting P. falciparum infections. A total of 397 individuals aged five years and above were tested for P. falciparum infections. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) of microscopy, Pf RDT and HSPf RDT was determined using PCR as the gold standard method.
resultsThe prevalence of P. falciparum infections determined by microscopy, SD Bioline Pf, HSPf and PCR was 21.9, 27.7, 33.3 and 43.2%, respectively. The new HSPf RDT had significantly higher sensitivity (98.2%) and specificity (91.6%) compared to the routinely used SD Bioline Pf RDT(P < 0.001). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 81.8% and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.2% for the routinely used SD Bioline Pf RDT. Moreover, HSPf RDT had sensitivity of 69% and specificity of 76.8% compared to microscopy. The PPV was 45.5% and the NPV was 89.8% for microscopy. Furthermore, the analytical sensitivity test indicated that the newly developed HSPf RDT had lower detection limits compared to routinely used SD Bioline RDT.
conclusionsHSPf RDT had better performance when compared to both microscopy and the currently used malaria RDTs. The false negativity could be associated with the low parasite density of the samples. False positivity may be related to the limitations of the expertise of microscopists or persistent antigenicity from previous infections in the case of RDTs. Nevertheless, HS PfRDT performed better compared to routinely used Pf RDT, and microscopy in detecting malaria infections. Therefore, HS Pf RDT presents the best alternative to the existing commercial/regularly available RDTs due to its sensitivity and specificity, and reliability in diagnosing malaria infections.
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.