ArticleMalaria journal2022
Evaluation of an ultrasensitive HRP2-based rapid diagnostic test for detection of asymptomatic Plasmodium falciparum parasitaemia among children in western Kenya.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are HRP2/3 deletions silently crippling malaria rapid diagnostic tests?The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Review
- T-follicular helper cell profiles differ by malaria antigen and for children compared to adults.eLife · 2025Article
- Comparison of three rapid diagnostic tests for Plasmodium falciparum diagnosis in Ghana.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Advances in Malaria Diagnostic Methods in Resource-Limited Settings: A Systematic Review.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Review
- Subclinical Inflammation in Asymptomatic Schoolchildren With Plasmodium falciparum Parasitemia Correlates With Impaired Cognition.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2024Article
- Performance of ultra-sensitive malaria rapid diagnostic test to detect Plasmodium falciparum infection in pregnant women in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Diagnostic performance of NxTekMalaria journal · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate detection of asymptomatic malaria parasitaemia in children living in high transmission areas is important for malaria control and reduction programmes that employ screen-and-treat surveillance strategies. Relative to microscopy and conventional rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), ultrasensitive RDTs (us-RDTs) have demonstrated reduced limits of detection with increased sensitivity to detect parasitaemia in symptomatic individuals. In this study, the performance of the NxTek
methodsIn October 2020, 240 healthy children without any reported malaria symptoms were screened for the presence of P. falciparum parasitaemia; 120 children were randomly selected to participate in a follow-up visit at 6-10 weeks. Malaria parasitaemia was assessed by blood-smear microscopy, us-RDT, and qPCR of a conserved var gene sequence from genomic DNA extracted from dried blood spots. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated for field diagnostic methods using qPCR as the gold standard. Comparison of detectable parasite density distributions and area under the curve were also calculated to determine the effectiveness of the us-RDT in detecting asymptomatic infections with low parasite densities.
resultsThe us-RDT detected significantly more asymptomatic P. falciparum infections than microscopy (42.5% vs. 32.2%, P = 0.002). The positive predictive value was higher for microscopy (92.2%) than for us-RDT (82.4%). However, false negative rates were high for microscopy and us-RDT, with negative predictive values of 53.7% and 54.6%, respectively. While us-RDT detected significantly more infections than microscopy overall, the density distribution of detectable infections did not differ (P = 0.21), and qPCR detected significantly more low-density infections than both field methods (P < 0.001, for both comparisons).
conclusionsUs-RDT is more sensitive than microscopy for detecting asymptomatic malaria parasitaemia in children. Though the detectable parasite density distributions by us-RDT in our specific study did not significantly differ from microscopy, the additional sensitivity of the us-RDT resulted in more identified asymptomatic infections in this important group of the population and makes the use of the us-RDT advisable compared to other currently available malaria field detection methods.
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.