Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36567845›Full record

ArticleJournal of medicine and life2022

Comparison of different rapid screening tests and ELISA for HBV, HCV, and HIV among healthy blood donors and recipients at Jibla University Hospital Yemen.

Abdullah Mohammed Al-Matary, Fadhl Ahmed Saed Al Gashaa

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.

Abdullah Mohammed Al-MataryDepartment of Human Medicine, College of Medical and Health Sciences, Jibla University, Jibla, Yemen.
Fadhl Ahmed Saed Al GashaaDepartment of Biology, Al Farabi University College, Baghdad, Iraq.
Iraqi University · IQJawaharlal Nehru Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood transfusion is associated with many risks, especially exposure to blood transfusion-transmitted infections considered one of the main causes of death worldwide, including hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The threat posed by blood-borne pathogens is disproportionately high, especially in developing countries, so there is a need for continuous monitoring of blood transfusions to prevent transmitting diseases. Rapid diagnostic immunochromatographic technique (ICT) methods are the most widely used methods in developing countries, although ELISA and molecular testing are considered more accurate worldwide. Therefore, the study aimed to compare the analytical sensitivity between rapid tests and the ELISA method for detecting HBV, HCV, and HIV infection among blood donors. Four hundred (400) blood donor samples were tested using the Rapid Test Kits (INTEC, SD, ABON, and CLUN), and the ELISA method was used as a confirmatory test. Out of 400 blood samples tested for viral infection, HBV, HCV, and HIV were detected in 8, 10, and 2 samples, respectively, using the ELISA technique. This study observed that the rate of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), in addition to determining the diagnostic accuracy rate and error rate for all rapid diagnostic kits in detecting HBV, HCV and HIV are less accurate and associated with more false negatives compared to the ELISA technique. This study showed a significant difference in sensitivity between ELISA and rapid diagnostic immunochromatographic technique (ICT) groups; therefore, rapid diagnosis is not suitable for testing the quality of infectious markers for blood donors.

Indexed as

Hepatitis CHIV InfectionsBlood DonorsEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayHepacivirusHepatitis B virusHIVHospitalsHumansYemenELISAHBVHCVHIVrapid diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID36567845
PMCPMC9762378
OpenAlexW4313424289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.