ArticleIJID regions2025
Mindray CL-900i assay: An effective assay for hepatitis B surface antigen screening with superior specificity.
Article in IJID regions, 2025. 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The chemiluminescence immunoassay automated Abbott ARCHITECT hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening assay is globally recognized for its superior sensitivity but notably low specificity. This mandates positive results confirmation by another confirmatory assay, such as the widely used Abbott ARCHITECT HBsAg neutralizing assay. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the new chemiluminescence immunoassay, Mindray CL-900i HBsAg screening assay in comparison to the ARCHITECT neutralizing/confirmatory assay. Methods: A total of 200 archived HBsAg-positive and -negative samples by ARCHITECT screening were selected for this study. These samples were classified as follows: true positive (n = 39): positive by ARCHITECT screening and confirmatory assays, true negative (n = 144): negative by ARCHITECT screening and confirmatory assays, and false positive (n = 17): positive by ARCHITECT screening but negative by confirmatory assay. All samples were retested using the Mindray CL-900i HBsAg screening assay. Results: Compared with ARCHITECT confirmatory assay, the Mindray HBsAg CL-900i demonstrated perfect agreement with the confirmatory assay, as indicated by a Cohen κ value of 0.98 (0.95-1.02). Mindray CL-900i exhibited a sensitivity of 97%, positive predictive value of 100%, and negative predictive value of 99%. The specificity was 100% because none of the true-negative and false-positive results were identified as positive. Conclusions: Mindray CL-900i could offer a cost-effective alternative for HBsAg screening, boasting perfect specificity and overcoming the limitations of current automated assays.
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.