Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38438953›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024

Independent clinic-based evaluation of point-of-care testing for the screening of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoea and Trichomonas vaginalis in women-at-risk in Australia, Guatemala, Morocco, and South Africa.

Mark Shephard, Susan Matthews, Ranmini Kularatne, Kelly Andrewartha, Karel Blondeel, Christian Alvarez, Elsy Camey, Amina Hançali, Etienne Müller, Aurelie Haw and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

21 authors at 9 institutions in 8 countries.

Mark ShephardInternational Centre for Point-of-Care Testing, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia. Mark.Shephard@flinders.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9181-1874
Susan MatthewsInternational Centre for Point-of-Care Testing, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia.
Ranmini KularatneCentre for HIV & STI, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Kelly AndrewarthaInternational Centre for Point-of-Care Testing, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia.
Karel BlondeelDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Christian AlvarezSida y Sociedad, ONG (SISO), Escuintla, Guatemala.
Elsy CameySida y Sociedad, ONG (SISO), Escuintla, Guatemala.
Amina HançaliNational Institute for Health, Rabat, Morocco.
Etienne MüllerCentre for HIV & STI, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Aurelie HawMédecins sans Frontières, Khayelitsha, Cape Town, South Africa.
Hicham OumzilNational Institute for Health, Rabat, Morocco.
Daniel GolparianWHO Collaborating Centre for Gonorrhoea and other STIs, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Dorian E RamirezFacultad de Ciencias Médicas, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guatemala.
James KiarieDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Firdavs KurbonovDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Massimo MirandolaInfectious Diseases Section, Department of Diagnostics and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Rosanna W PeelingDepartment of Clinical Research, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Ronaldo SilvaDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Soe Soe ThwinDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Magnus UnemoWHO Collaborating Centre for Gonorrhoea and other STIs, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Igor ToskinDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
World Health Organization · CHFlinders University · AUNational Institute for Communicable DiseasesÖrebro University · SEGhent University · BELondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMédecins Sans Frontières · ZAUniversidad de San Carlos de Guatemala · GTUniversity of Verona · IT

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2018, the World Health Organization commenced a multi-country validation study of the Cepheid GeneXpert for a range of molecular-based point-of-care (POC) tests in primary care settings. One study arm focused on the evaluation of POC tests for screening 'women at risk' for chlamydia (CT), gonorrhoea (NG) and trichomonas (TV) in four countries - Australia, Guatemala, Morocco and South Africa.

methodsStudy participants completed a pre-test questionnaire which included demographics, clinical information and general questions on POC testing (POCT). Two vaginal swab samples (either self-collected or clinician collected) from each patient were tested on the GeneXpert at the POC and at a reference laboratory using quality-assured nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs).

resultsOne thousand three hundred and eighty-three women were enrolled: 58.6% from South Africa, 29.2% from Morocco, 6.2% from Guatemala, and 6.0% from Australia. 1296 samples for CT/NG and 1380 samples for TV were tested by the GeneXpert and the reference NAAT. The rate of unsuccessful tests on the GeneXpert was 1.9% for CT, 1.5% for NG and 0.96% for TV. The prevalence of CT, NG and TV was 31%, 13% and 23%, respectively. 1.5% of samples were positive for all three infections; 7.8% were positive for CT and NG; 2.4% were positive for NG and TV; and 7.3% were positive for CT and TV. Compared to reference NAATs, pooled estimates of sensitivity for the GeneXpert tests were 83.7% (95% confidence intervals 69.2-92.1) for CT, 90.5% (85.1-94.1) for NG and 64.7% (58.1-70.7) for TV (although estimates varied considerably between countries). Estimates for specificity were ≥96% for all three tests both within- and between-countries. Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios were: 32.7 ([CI] 21.2-50.5) and 0.17 (0.08-0.33) for CT; 95.3 (36.9-245.7) and 0.10 (0.06-0.15) for NG; and 56.5 (31.6-101.1) and 0.35 (0.27-0.47) for TV.

conclusionThis multi-country evaluation is the first of its kind world-wide. Positive likelihood ratios, as well as specificity estimates, indicate the GeneXpert POC test results for CT, NG and TV were clinically acceptable for ruling in the presence of disease. However, negative likelihood ratios and variable sensitivity estimates from this study were poorer than expected for ruling out these infections, particularly for TV.

trial registrationEthics approval to conduct the ProSPeRo study was granted by the WHO Ethics Review Committee, as well as local ethics committees from all participating countries.

Indexed as

GonorrheaTrichomonas vaginalisAustraliaChlamydia trachomatisFemaleGuatemalaHumansMoroccoNeisseria gonorrhoeaePoint-of-Care TestingSouth AfricaGeneXpertMulti-countryPoint-of-care testingSensitivitySexually transmitted infectionsSpecificity

Identifiers

PMID38438953
PMCPMC10910521
OpenAlexW4392373994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.