ArticleParasites & vectors2024
Diagnostic performance of an ultra-sensitive RDT and a conventional RDT in malaria mass testing, treatment and tracking interventions in southern Ghana.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- False-positive and false-negative malaria rapid diagnostic test results: evidence from a nationally representative survey of children in Ghana.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Increased Plasmodium falciparum EBA175RIII-V antibody titres despite a 13-month malaria mass testing, treatment, and tracking intervention in a high malaria endemic community in Ghana.Malaria journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApplication of numerous malaria control interventions has led to reduction in clinical malaria cases and deaths but also the realisation that asymptomatic parasite carriers play a key role in sustaining transmission. This study assessed the effectiveness of using the Ultra-sensitive NxTek eliminate RDT (uRDT) and conventional SD Bioline HRP2 RDT (cRDT) in diagnosing asymptomatic parasitaemia while measuring the impact of mass testing, treatment and tracking (MTTT) on the prevalence of asymptomatic malaria over a 1-year period in Ghana.
methodsA total of 4000 targeted participants from two towns, Obom and Kofi Kwei, with their surrounding villages, were tested for asymptomatic malaria four times over the study period using uRDT (intervention) and the cRDT (control) respectively. Participants carrying malaria parasites were followed by home visit and phone calls for compliance to treatment, and filter paper blood blots collected from participants were used to determine true parasite carriage by PET-PCR. A mathematical model of the study site was developed and used to test the impact of test sensitivity and mass migration on the effect of MTTT.
resultsThe start and end point sensitivities of the cRDT were 48.8% and 41.7% and those for the uRDT were 52.9% and 59.9% respectively. After a year of MTTTs, asymptomatic parasite prevalence, as determined by PCR, did not differ statistically in the control site (40.6% to 40.1%, P = 0.730) but decreased at the intervention site (55.9% to 46.4%, P < 0.0001). Parasite prevalence by RDT, however, indicated statistical reduction in the control site (25.3% to 22.3%, P = 0.017) and no change in the intervention site (35.1% to 36.0%, P = 0.614). The model predicted a mild effect of both diagnostic sensitivity and human movement in diminishing the impact of MTTT in the study sites.
conclusionsAsymptomatic parasite prevalence at the molecular level reduced significantly in the site where the uRDT was used but not where the cRDT was used. Overall, the uRDT exhibited higher sensitivity relative to the cRDT. Highly sensitive molecular techniques such as PET-PCR should be included in parasite prevalence estimation during MTTT exercises.
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.