ArticleParasite epidemiology and control2024
Field sensitivity and specificity of the SD BIOLINE onchocerciasis IgG4 Rapid Diagnostic Test in children <10 years old from endemic areas in Burkina Faso.
Article in Parasite epidemiology and control, 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.
- Modelling anti-Ov16 seroprevalence for the control and elimination of onchocerciasis.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Declining Onchocerca volvulus transmission despite limited ivermectin delivery in the Kakoi-Koda focus, Ituri, Democratic Republic of the Congo: An epidemiological, entomological and landscape evidence synthesis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of an ELISA to Detect Antibody to Onchocerca volvulus Infection Using Mammalian Expressed Recombinant Ov16.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2026Article
- Pan filarial-nested PCR with gelified tubes: a new approach towards point-of-care testing for human filariasisFIRST REVIEW ROUND - REVIEWERS' COMMENTSREVIEWERS' COMMENTS.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Skin biopsies (Skin snips) have historically been the gold standard for the diagnosis of onchocerciasis. However, in low prevalence areas and in areas with successful ivermectin mass drug administration (MDA) programs, skin snips are not sensitive enough to decide when to stop MDA; thus, serological diagnostic tools have been recommended for this purpose. This study assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the Ov16 Rapid Diagnostic Test (SD BIOLINE Onchocerciasis RDT) compared to skin snip in endemic areas undergoing ivermectin mass distribution using Community Directed Treatment with Ivermectin (CDTI) strategy. A cross-sectional study was conducted between September and November 2016 in five endemic villages in the Cascades region in Burkina Faso. Children aged 2 to 9-years were examined during the impact epidemiological survey using both the skin snip and Ov16 Rapid Diagnostic Test. The Ov16 Rapid Diagnostic Test sensitivity and specificity were determined with reference to the skin biopsy. Skin snip positivity was 1.25% in this population, while seroprevalence was 6.5%. When compared to the skin snip as the gold standard, the sensitivity of the Ov16 Rapid Diagnostic Test was 60% and the specificity 94%. When the Ov16 Rapid Diagnostic Test was considered as the gold standard, the skin snip exhibited a sensitivity of 11.5% and a specificity of 99.5%. These results are similar to other studies comparing the performance of the Ov16 ELISA to skin snips, suggesting that the Ov16 RDT may be a useful tool for ivermectin STOP MDA and post transmission surveys, assuming that the prevalence of infection is low or close to zero, and the Ov16 RDT detected also pre patent infections.
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.