ArticleBioMed research international2022
Noninvasive Approach of
Article in BioMed research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate, cost-effective, and noninvasive alternative molecular methods are needed for detecting low malaria parasitemia. The currently-used nested polymerase chain reaction (nPCR) requires blood as well as skilled personnel in order to minimise the risk of bloodborne disease transmission. Therefore, this study is aimed at assessing the accuracy of a noninvasive and more affordable malaria diagnosis with saliva using the loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) technique. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the Centre and Southwest regions of Cameroon. Matched blood and saliva samples collected from symptomatic and asymptomatic participants were tested for malaria using rapid diagnostic tests, microscopy, PCR, and LAMP. Statistics were performed using R studio software at 95% confidence interval. Results: A total of 100 participants (65% symptomatic and 35% asymptomatic) aged between 1 and 74 years with a balanced gender distribution ratio of 1.08 were included in our study. The prevalence of malaria was 61%, 57%, 59%, 42%, 35%, 17%, and 16% for blood-RDT, blood-PCR, blood-LAMP, blood-RT-LAMP, saliva-PCR, saliva-RT-LAMP, and saliva-LAMP, respectively. Both saliva and blood showed a sensitivity of 43.90% and respective specificities of 68.75% and 57.62%. When using RT-LAMP, sensitivities of 49.38% and 48.21% and specificities of 94.11% and 66.67% were recorded for saliva and blood, respectively. Sensitivities of 70.23% and 73.49% and specificities of 62.5% and 76.47% were recorded, respectively, for saliva-LAMP and saliva-RT-LAMP when compared to saliva-PCR as the gold standard. Saliva-LAMP and saliva-RT-LAMP had a fair agreement (
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.