ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2024
Diagnostic performance of the bioline dengue duo rapid test on symptomatic patients assisted at Armed Forces Hospital (Hfa) in Brasília, Brazil.
Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2024. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dengue necessitates accurate diagnosis. Rapid tests such as Bioline™ DENGUE DUO have gained traction, but validation in specific populations is essential. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the Bioline™ test, alongside assessing the socio-epidemiological profile of symptomatic patients in a Brasília Military Hospital. The serum of 404 symptomatic patients was analyzed by the Bioline™ DENGUE DUO test, followed by Dengue virus detection and discrimination of the four serotypes by RT-qPCR. Accuracy was assessed using parameters including sensitivity (S), specificity (E), positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), and positive (RV +) and negative (RV-) likelihood ratios. The NS1 component exhibited a sensitivity of 70.37%, a specificity of 97.30%, and an overall efficiency of 90.10% when compared to RT-qPCR as the gold standard. The IgM component demonstrated a sensitivity of 26.85%, a specificity of 89.53%, and an overall efficiency of 72.77% when compared to RT-qPCR as the gold standard. The IgG component demonstrated a sensitivity of 23.15%, a specificity of 68.92%, and an overall efficiency of 56.68% when compared to RT-qPCR as the gold standard. Several rapid tests are commercially available. However, considering variations across regions and demographic groups, it is important to question their accuracy in specific populations. Rapid tests are important screening tools, but they can have limitations for the certainty of diagnosis. Bioline™ DENGUE DUO displayed good specificity, but sensitivity was slightly below optimal levels. While helpful for confirming dengue, improvements are needed to effectively rule out the disease.
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.