Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37006975›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion2023

Comparison of Two Different Serological Viral Marker Testing Assays for Screening of Apheresis Donors: Which Assay Provides Optimum Safety for Transfusion?

Aseem K Tiwari, Divya Setya, Ravi Dara, Dinesh Arora, Swati Pabbi Mehta, Geet Aggarwal, Gunjan Bhardwaj

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Aseem K TiwariDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Medanta-The Medicity, Sector-38, Gurgaon, 122001 India.
Divya SetyaDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Histocompatibility and Molecular Biology, Sector-128, Noida, 201304 India.ORCID 0000-0003-2593-5235
Ravi DaraDepartment of Immunohematology and Transfusion Medicine, Manipal Hospital, Sector-5, Vidyadharnagar, Jaipur, India.
Dinesh AroraDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Medanta-The Medicity, Sector-38, Gurgaon, 122001 India.
Swati Pabbi MehtaDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Medanta-The Medicity, Sector-38, Gurgaon, 122001 India.
Geet AggarwalDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Medanta-The Medicity, Sector-38, Gurgaon, 122001 India.
Gunjan BhardwajDepartment of Transfusion Medicine, Medanta-The Medicity, Lucknow, India.
Medanta The Medicity · INJaypee Hospital · INManipal Hospital · INMedanta The Medicity · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While whole blood testing has evolved over the years, viral marker testing for plateletpheresis donors is still performed by Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDT). Aim of this study was to compare diagnostic accuracy of RDT and Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA) in serological testing for HBsAg, anti-HCV and anti-HIV antibodies. A prospective, analytical study was conducted in the department of Transfusion Medicine at a tertiary healthcare center in India between September 2016 and August 2018. Samples were simultaneously tested by CLIA, RDT and a confirmatory test. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values and mean time taken to report results were calculated. A total of 102 (1.48%) of the 6883 samples were found to be reactive by either or both the assays. A total of 74 (1.08%) samples were HBsAg reactive, 23 (0.33%) were reactive for anti-HCV antibodies and 5 (0.07%) were reactive for anti-HIV I and II antibodies. A combined sero-prevalence of 1.05% (72) was observed; 0.78% (54) for HBsAg, 0.26% (18) for anti-HCV antibodies and none for anti-HIV I and II antibodies. Four (3.85%) reactive samples were missed by RDT and therefore sensitivity of RDT was quite less as compared to CLIA. RDT and CLIA both were found to have a statistically significant shorter turnaround time than confirmatory tests. There is increasing need to develop a safe donor screening strategy for plateletpheresis. CLIA offers an excellent alterative to RDT for viral marker testing in terms of sensitivity.

Indexed as

Anti-HCVAnti-HIVCLIAHBsAgRDT

Identifiers

PMID37006975
PMCPMC10064355
OpenAlexW4292263281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.