Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38688565›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2024

Rapid diagnostic test: a critical need for outbreak preparedness and response for high priority pathogens.

Solomon Abebe Yimer, Birgitte Boonstra Booij, Gwen Tobert, Andrew Hebbeler, Paul Oloo, Polina Brangel, Maïna L'Azou Jackson, Richard Jarman, Danielle Craig, Michael Selorm Avumegah and 7 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. EfficientAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

17 authors.

Solomon Abebe YimerCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway solomon.yimer@cepi.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0959-3052
Birgitte Boonstra BooijCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.
Gwen TobertCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.
Andrew HebbelerCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Washington, DC, USA.
Paul OlooCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, London, UK.
Polina BrangelCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, London, UK.
Maïna L'Azou JacksonCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7753-0630
Richard JarmanCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Washington, DC, USA.
Danielle CraigCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Washington, DC, USA.
Michael Selorm AvumegahCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.
Henshaw MandiCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.
Timothy EndyCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Washington, DC, USA.
Stacey WoodenCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Washington, DC, USA.
Carolyn ClarkCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.
Valentina BernasconiCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.
Amy ShurtleffCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Washington, DC, USA.
Paul A KristiansenCoalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are critical for preparedness and response against an outbreak or pandemic and have been highlighted in the 100 Days Mission, a global initiative that aims to prepare the world for the next epidemic/pandemic by driving the development of diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics within 100 days of recognition of a novel Disease X threat.RDTs play a pivotal role in early case identification, surveillance and case management, and are critical for initiating deployment of vaccine and monoclonal antibodies. Currently available RDTs, however, have limited clinical sensitivity and specificity and inadequate validation. The development, validation and implementation of RDTs require adequate and sustained financing from both public and private sources. While the World Health Assembly recently passed a resolution on diagnostic capacity strengthening that urges individual Member States to commit resources towards this, the resolution is not binding and implementation will likely be impeded by limited financial resources and other competing priorities, particularly in low-income countries. Meanwhile, the diagnostic industry has not sufficiently invested in RDT development for high priority pathogens.Currently, vaccine development projects are getting the largest funding support among medical countermeasures. Yet vaccines are insufficient tools in isolation, and pandemic preparedness will be incomplete without parallel investment in diagnostics and therapeutics.The Pandemic Fund, a global financing mechanism recently established for strengthening pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, may be a future avenue for supporting diagnostic development.In this paper, we discuss why RDTs are critical for preparedness and response. We also discuss RDT investment challenges and reflect on the way forward.

Indexed as

Disease OutbreaksPandemic PreparednessRapid Diagnostic TestsGlobal HealthHumansPandemicsdiagnostics and tools

Identifiers

PMID38688565
PMCPMC11085978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.