Trial reportParasitology research2021
Diagnostic performance of rapid diagnostic test, light microscopy and polymerase chain reaction during mass survey conducted in low and high malaria-endemic areas from two North-Eastern states of India.
Trial report in Parasitology research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Molecular assays for determining sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine drug resistance in India: a systematic review.Parasitology research · 2022Pooled it
- Unmasking Malaria: Microscopy and nPCR Reveal the Hidden Misdiagnosis ofInterdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Assessment of Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Tests and Histidine-Rich Protein 2 Deletions among Asymptomatic Children and Adults in Bagamoyo, Tanzania.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- Performance of the Bioline™ Malaria Ag Pf/Pan and Bioline™ Malaria Ag Pf/Pv for Malaria Diagnostics: Madagascar In-Country Evaluation.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- Autofluorescence of Red Blood Cells Infected withBiosensors · 2025Article
- Identification of visible and near-infrared signature peaks for arboviruses and Plasmodium falciparum.PloS one · 2025Article
- ISCCM Position Statement on the Management of Severe Malaria in Intensive Care Unit.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024Article
- Comparative evaluation of the diagnostic accuracies of four different malaria rapid diagnostic test kits available in Ghana.PloS one · 2024Article
- Field Evaluation of a Hemozoin-Based Malaria Diagnostic Device in Puerto Lempira, Honduras.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Epidemiology of malaria and anemia in high and low malaria-endemic North-Eastern districts of India.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An early and accurate diagnosis followed by prompt treatment is pre-requisite for the management of any disease. Malaria diagnosis is routinely performed by microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in the field settings; however, their performance may vary across regions, age and asymptomatic status. Owing to this, we assessed the diagnostic performance of conventional and advanced molecular tools for malaria detection in low and high malaria-endemic settings. We performed mass blood surveys in low and high endemic regions of two North-Eastern districts from the states of Assam and Meghalaya. A total of 3322 individuals were screened for malaria using RDT, microscopy and PCR and measures of diagnostic accuracy were estimated. Out of 3322 individuals, 649 (19.5%) were detected with malaria parasite. Asymptomatic were 86.4% (2872/3322), of which 19.4% (557/2872) had Plasmodium infection. The sensitivity and specificity of microscopy were 42.7% and 99.3%, and RDT showed 49.9% and 90.4%, respectively, considering PCR as standard. RDT (AUC: 0.65 vs 0.74; p = 0.001) and microscopy (AUC: 0.64 vs 0.76; p < 0.0001) performances were significantly lower in low compared to high endemic areas. True positive rate was lower in asymptomatics but true negative rate was found similar to symptomatic individuals. The conventional diagnostic tools (RDT and microscopy) had detected malaria in children with nearly twofold greater sensitivity than in the adults (p < 0.05). To conclude, asymptomatics, adults and low malaria-endemic regions require major attention due to mediocre performance of conventional diagnostic tools in malaria detection.
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.