ArticleMalaria journal2023
Performance of ultra-sensitive malaria rapid diagnostic test to detect Plasmodium falciparum infection in pregnant women in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Article in Malaria journal, 2023. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Evaluation of microscopy and first response™ malaria Ag PAN/Pf RDT compared to qPCR and hemoglobin levels in pregnant women at delivery in Busia County, Western Kenya.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Barriers to malaria prevention services in pregnancy: a multi-methods study in rural western Uganda.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Power and sample size considerations for test-negative design with bias correction: a case study on the world first malaria vaccine.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Article
- Plasmodium falciparum with pfhrp2 and pfhrp3 gene deletions in asymptomatic malaria infections in the Lake Victoria region, Kenya.Tropical medicine and health · 2024Article
- Comparison of three rapid diagnostic tests for Plasmodium falciparum diagnosis in Ghana.Malaria journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow peripheral parasitaemia caused by sequestration of Plasmodium falciparum in the placenta hampers the diagnosis of malaria in pregnant women, leading to microscopy or conventional rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) false-negative results. Although mainly asymptomatic, maternal malaria remains harmful to pregnant women and their offspring in endemic settings and must be adequately diagnosed. Ultra-sensitive RDTs (uRDTs) are thought to be more sensitive than RDTs, and their diagnostic performance was assessed in the current study in pregnant women living in Kinshasa, a stable malaria transmission area in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
methodsTo assess and compare the diagnostic performances of both RDTs and uRDTs, 497 peripheral blood samples were tested using microscopy and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) as the index and the reference tests, respectively. The agreement between the different diagnostic tests assessed was estimated by Cohen's Kappa test.
resultsThe median parasite density by qPCR was 292 p/μL of blood [IQR (49.7-1137)]. Using qPCR as the reference diagnostic test, the sensitivities of microscopy, RDT and uRDT were respectively [55.7% (95% CI 47.6-63.6)], [81.7% (95%CI 74.7-87.3)] and [88% (95% CI 81.9-92.6)]. The specificities of the tests were calculated at 98.5% (95% CI 96.6-99.5), 95.2% (95% CI 92.5-97.2) and 94.4% (95% CI 91.4-96.6) for microscopy, RDT and uRDT, respectively. The agreement between qPCR and uRDT was almost perfect (Kappa = 0.82). For parasite density (qPCR) below 100 p/µL, the sensitivity of RDT was 62% (95% CI 47.1-75.3) compared to 68% (95% CI 53.3-80.4) for uRDT. Between 100 and 200 p/µL, the sensitivity of RDT was higher, but still lower compared to uRDT: 89.4% (95% CI 66.8-98.7) for RDT versus 100% (95% CI 82.3-100) for uRDT. In both cases, microscopy was lower, with 20% (95% CI 10-33.7) and 47.3% (95% CI 24.4-71.1) respectively.
conclusionsuRDT has the potential to improve malaria management in pregnant women as it has been found to be slightly more sensitive than RDT in the detection of malaria in pregnant women but the difference was not significant. Microscopy has a more limited value for the diagnosis of malaria during the pregnancy, because of its lower sensitivity.
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.