ArticleMalaria journal2021
No evidence of false-negative Plasmodium falciparum rapid diagnostic results in Monrovia, Liberia.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The resurgence of malaria in Northern Iran in 2023: a wake-up call.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Low Prevalence of Deletions of the pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 Genes in Plasmodium falciparum Parasites in Freetown, Sierra Leone in 2015.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 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
12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMalaria diagnosis in many malaria-endemic countries relies mainly on the use of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). The majority of commercial RDTs used in Africa detect the Plasmodium falciparum histidine-rich protein 2 (PfHRP2). pfhrp2/3 gene deletions can therefore lead to false-negative RDT results. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency of PCR-confirmed, false-negative P. falciparum RDT results in Monrovia, Liberia.
methodsPfHRP2-based RDT (Paracheck Pf®) and microscopy results from 1038 individuals with fever or history of fever (n = 951) and pregnant women at first antenatal care (ANC) visit (n = 87) enrolled in the Saint Joseph's Catholic Hospital (Monrovia) from March to July 2019 were used to assess the frequency of false-negative RDT results. True-false negatives were confirmed by detecting the presence of P. falciparum DNA by quantitative PCR in samples from individuals with discrepant RDT and microscopy results. Samples that were positive by 18S rRNA qPCR but negative by PfHRP2-RDT were subjected to multiplex qPCR assay for detection of pfhrp2 and pfhrp3.
resultsOne-hundred and eighty-six (19.6%) and 200 (21.0%) of the 951 febrile participants had a P. falciparum-positive result by RDT and microscopy, respectively. Positivity rate increased with age and the reporting of joint pain, chills and shivers, vomiting and weakness, and decreased with the presence of coughs and nausea. The positivity rate at first ANC visit was 5.7% (n = 5) and 8% (n = 7) by RDT and microscopy, respectively. Out of 207 Plasmodium infections detected by microscopy, 22 (11%) were negative by RDT. qPCR confirmed absence of P. falciparum DNA in the 16 RDT-negative but microscopy-positive samples which were available for molecular testing. Among the 14 samples that were positive by qPCR but negative by RDT and microscopy, 3 only amplified pfldh, and among these 3 all were positive for pfhrp2 and pfhrp3.
conclusionThere is no qPCR-confirmed evidence of false-negative RDT results due to pfhrp2/pfhrp3 deletions in this study conducted in Monrovia (Liberia). This indicates that these deletions are not expected to affect the performance of PfHRP2-based RDTs for the diagnosis of malaria in Liberia. Nevertheless, active surveillance for the emergence of PfHRP2 deletions is required.
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.