ArticleMalaria journal2022
Comparison of the performance of the CareStart Malaria Pf/Pan Combo test and field microscopy in the diagnosis of Plasmodium vivax malaria in North Sumatera, Indonesia.
Article in Malaria journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Malaria misdiagnosis among febrile patients in Senegal: implications for the underestimation of Plasmodium species diversity and malaria burden.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Utility of rapid diagnostic tests and microscopy to detect malaria in health facilities across the Solomon Islands.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the performance of advantage P.f. malaria CardParasites & vectors · 2023Article
- Spatial analysis to evaluate risk of malaria in Northern Sumatera, Indonesia.Malaria journal · 2022Article
- Performance of highly sensitive and conventional rapid diagnostic tests for clinical and subclinical Plasmodium falciparum infections, and hrp2/3 deletion status in Burundi.PLOS global 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn areas where malaria is endemic and where trained microscopists are not available, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are needed not only to allow prompt treatment without delay but also to prevent overdiagnosis and overtreatment based on clinical judgements that may lead to drug resistance. This study aimed to compare the performances of the CareStart Pf/Pan Combo test to field microscopy, which is considered to be the gold standard for malaria diagnosis.
methodsAny person with a fever or a history of fever within 48 h who came to the health centre was recruited for the study and tested both by the CareStart Pf/Pan test and by field microscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were analysed with both methods.
resultsTwo-hundred study participants were enrolled: 96 (48%) were found to be positive through microscopy, while 100 (50%) participants were found to be positive through RDT. The RDT produced four false-positive results. High sensitivity and specificity were observed for the CareStart Pf/Pan test (100 and 96.15%, respectively). The CareStart Pf/Pan test also showed excellent agreement with the field microscopy results.
conclusionThe Carestart Pf/Pan could be used as an alternative diagnostic test in malaria-endemic areas where facility for performing microscopy is not available.
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.