ArticleMalariaWorld journal2017
Comparative assessment of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) in Ibadan, Nigeria.
Article in MalariaWorld journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stakeholders' perception of a total market approach to HIV self-testing (HIVST) for the private sector in Nigeria.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Agreement among rapid diagnostic tests, urine malaria tests, and microscopy in malaria diagnosis of adult patients in southwestern Nigeria.The Journal of international medical research · 2022Article
- Performance evaluation of a popular malaria RDT in Nigeria compared with microscopy.Journal of parasitic diseases : official organ of the Indian Society for Parasitology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeployment of sound diagnostic tests remains a crucial component of malaria management, prevention and control in Africa. We undertook a comparative assessment of sensitivity, specificity and efficiency of three popular brands of rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) available in Nigerian market alongside with traditional microscopy. MATERIALS AND
methods525 samples of patients that presented with acute uncomplicated malaria through clinical diagnosis were evaluated with the various tests. Total WBC count and haematocrit were also measured.
resultsOf the 525 samples, 300 (57.1%) were found positive by Giemsa microscopy. SD Bioline had a positivity rate of 49.5% (260/525), while the positivity rate for Acon was significantly lower (38.1%; 200/525) and Paracheck (28.6%; 150/525). The sensitivity, specificity and efficiency of the three RDTs were: SD Bioline (86.3%, 99.6%, 92%); Paracheck (50%, 97.7%, 70.4%) and Acon (66.7%, 100%, 80.9%), respectively. Pre-teens aged 6-12 yrs had the highest mean malaria parasite densities with 6,631.26 at p< 0.01. The dominant malaria species was
conclusionsMicroscopy still remains the reference standard for malaria diagnosis in limited resource settings in endemic areas. In furtherance to this, there is need for consistent monitoring of RDT product quality as part of the distribution process to end-users across Nigeria.
Identifiers
34532240PMC8415058What 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.