ArticleMalaria journal2023
Diagnostic performance of ultrasensitive rapid diagnostic test for the detection of Plasmodium falciparum infections in asymptomatic individuals in Kisangani, Northeast Democratic Republic of 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance and challenges of malaria rapid diagnostic tests in endemic regions of Africa.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Epidemiology and diversity of Plasmodium species in Franceville and their implications for malaria control.Scientific reports · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasensitive rapid diagnostic test (usRDT) was recently developed to improve the detection of low-density Plasmodium falciparum infections. However, its diagnostic performance has not been evaluated in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This study aims to determine the performance of the usRDT in malaria diagnosis in asymptomatic individuals under field condition in Kisangani, Northeast of DRC.
methodsA community-based cross-sectional study was carried out from June to August 2022 on 312 asymptomatic individuals residing in the city of Kisangani. Capillary blood samples were collected by finger prick for microscopic examination of thick and thin blood film, RDTs, and nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Alere™ Malaria Ag P.f usRDT and conventional RDT (cRDT/SD Bioline Malaria Ag P.f) kits were used for the detection of Plasmodium histidine rich protein 2 (HRP2) antigen as a proxy for the presence of P. falciparum. The diagnostic performance of the usRDT was compared with cRDT, microscopy and PCR.
resultsThe prevalence of asymptomatic P. falciparum malaria was 40.4%, 42.0%, 47.1% and 54.2% by cRDT, microscopy, usRDT and PCR, respectively. By using PCR as a reference, usRDT had sensitivity and specificity of 87.0% (95% CI 81.4-91.7) and 100.0% (95% CI 97.5-100.0), respectively, whereas the cRDT had sensitivity and specificity of 74.6% (95% CI 67.3-80.9) and 100% (95% CI 97.1-100.0), respectively. By using microscopy as a reference, usRDT had sensitivity and specificity of 96.9% (95% CI 92.4-99.2) and 89.0% (95% CI 83.5-93.1), respectively, while the cRDT had sensitivity and specificity of 96.2% (95% CI 92.3-98.7) and 100% (95% CI 97.9-100.0), respectively.
conclusionThe usRDT showed better diagnostic performance with higher sensitivity than the cRDT which is currently in use as point-of-care test. Further research is necessary to assess the access and cost-effectiveness of the usRDTs to use for malaria surveillance.
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.