Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34157032›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Field validation of a magneto-optical detection device (Gazelle) for portable point-of-care Plasmodium vivax diagnosis.

Hugo O Valdivia, Priyaleela Thota, Greys Braga, Leonila Ricopa, Keare Barazorda, Carola Salas, Danett K Bishop, Christie A Joya

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hugo O ValdiviaDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.ORCID 0000-0003-2159-5667
Priyaleela ThotaHemex Health, Inc., Portland, OR, United States of America.
Greys BragaDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.
Leonila RicopaDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.
Keare BarazordaDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.
Carola SalasDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.
Danett K BishopDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.
Christie A JoyaDepartment of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru.
United States Naval Medical Research Unit SOUTH · PE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A major challenge for malaria is the lack of tools for accurate and timely diagnosis in the field which are critical for case management and surveillance. Microscopy along with rapid diagnostic tests are the current mainstay for malaria diagnosis in most endemic regions. However, these methods present several limitations. This study assessed the accuracy of Gazelle, a novel rapid malaria diagnostic device, from samples collected from the Peruvian Amazon between 2019 and 2020. Diagnostic accuracy was compared against microscopy and two rapid diagnostic tests (SD Bioline and BinaxNOW) using 18ssr nested-PCR as reference test. In addition, a real-time PCR assay (PET-PCR) was used for parasite quantification. Out of 217 febrile patients enrolled and tested, 180 specimens (85 P. vivax and 95 negatives) were included in the final analysis. Using nested-PCR as the gold standard, the sensitivity and specificity of Gazelle was 88.2% and 97.9%, respectively. Using a cutoff of 200 parasites/μl, Gazelle's sensitivity for samples with more than 200 p/uL was 98.67% (95%CI: 92.79% to 99.97%) whereas the sensitivity for samples lower than 200 p/uL (n = 10) was 12.5% (95%CI: 0.32% to 52.65%). Gazelle's sensitivity and specificity were statistically similar to microscopy (sensitivity = 91.8, specificity = 100%, p = 0.983) and higher than both SD Bioline (sensitivity = 82.4, specificity = 100%, p = 0.016) and BinaxNOW (sensitivity = 71.8%, specificity = 97.9%, p = 0.002). The diagnostic accuracy of Gazelle for malaria detection in P. vivax infections was comparable to light microscopy and superior to both RDTs even in the presence of low parasitemia infections. The performance of Gazelle makes it a valuable tool for malaria diagnosis and active case detection that can be utilized in different malaria-endemic regions.

Indexed as

Plasmodium vivaxPoint-of-Care SystemsPoint-of-Care TestingAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMalaria, VivaxMaleMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34157032
PMCPMC8219132
OpenAlexW3176709251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.