ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2024
Comparative evaluation of lateral flow assays to diagnose chronic Trypanosoma cruzi infection in Bolivia.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancing diagnostics for Chagas disease: key product characteristics and harmonized evaluation strategies - an expert meeting report.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of the TR Chagas Bio-Manguinhos rapid test for detecting anti-Trypanosoma cruzi IgG in human samples from three Southern Cone countries.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Recombinant proteins as promising antigens applied to the immunodiagnosis of Chagas disease: a scoping review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- The Oxente Chagas Bahia Project: evaluating the efficacy of a rapid diagnostic test and treatments for Chagas disease.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Bolivia has the highest incidence of Chagas disease (CD) worldwide. Caused by the parasite Trypanasoma cruzi, CD is generally a chronic condition. Diagnosis is logistically and financially challenging, requiring at least two different laboratory-based serological tests. Many CD cases are missed; in Bolivia it is estimated just 6% of individuals chronically infected with T. cruzi get diagnosed. Achieving control on the way to elimination of CD requires a radical simplification of the current CD testing pathways, to overcome the barriers to accessing CD treatment. We aimed to generate unbiased performance data of lateral flow assays (LFAs) for T. cruzi infection in Bolivia, to evaluate their usefulness for improving T. cruzi diagnosis rates in a precise and efficient manner. This retrospective, laboratory-based, diagnostic evaluation study sought to estimate the sensitivity/specificity of 10 commercially available LFAs for T. cruzi, using the current CD diagnostic algorithm employed in Bolivia as the reference test method. All tests were blinded at the study site and performed by three operators. In total, 470 serum samples were tested, including 221 and 249 characterized as CD-positive/-negative, respectively. The LFAs were scored according to their relative importance using a decision-tree-based algorithm, with the mean decrease in Gini index as the scoring metric. The estimates of sensitivities ranged from 62.2-97.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) lower bound 55.0-94.7%); for specificities the range was 78.6-100% (95% CI lower bound 72.0-97.5%); 5/10 and 6/10 tests had sensitivity >90% and specificity >95%, respectively. Four LFAs showed high values of both sensitivity (93-95%) and specificity (97-99%). The agreement between 6 LFAs and the reference tests was almost perfect (Kappa 0.83-0.94). Most LFAs evaluated thus showed performances comparable with current laboratory-based diagnostic methods.
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.