ArticleParasites & vectors2023
Evaluation of the performance of advantage P.f. malaria Card
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2023. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Togo, malaria remains a major public health problem, and the management of suspected cases requires confirmation with appropriate biological methods. Malaria diagnosis has been improved by the introduction of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) for areas where microscopy is not available. To be used, these RDTs must meet performance criteria defined by the WHO. This study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of two RDTs: Advantage P.f. Malaria Card
methodsThis was a cross-sectional analytical study conducted from December 2019 to February 2020 on malaria-suspected cases received in three sentinel sites in Togo and from whom capillary blood was collected to perform the two RDTs according to the manufacturer's instructions. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated by comparing to thick/thin blood smear, the gold standard, and to PCR, which is a more sensitive.
resultsA total of 390 participants (54.9% female) with a median age of 18 (± 0.8) years were included in the study. The sensitivity of both Advantage P.f. Malaria Card® and Advantage Malaria Pan + Pf Card
conclusionsThe performances of the Advantage P.f. Malaria Card
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.