ArticleEmerging infectious diseases2025
Diagnostic Accuracy of 3 Mpox Lateral Flow Assays for Antigen Detection, Democratic Republic of the Congo and United Kingdom.
Article in Emerging infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of a portable multiplex real-time pcr assay for the detection of monkeypox virus and non-variola orthopoxviruses.Virology journal · 2026Article
- Review
- Serological differentiation between Mpox infection and vaccine-induced immunity: a mini-review.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- From neglected to notoriety: a review of Mpox clinical features, virology, epidemiology, treatment and prevention strategies.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Review
- Head-to-head comparison of anterior nares and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in a community drive-through test centre in the UK.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Observational
- Mpox: current knowledge and understanding-a scoping review.FEMS microbiology reviews · 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
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ongoing outbreaks of mpox highlight the urgent need for a rapid and low-cost diagnostic test to accurately detect and control this emerging disease. We estimated the analytical sensitivity using viral culture of the monkeypox virus clade IIb lineage B1 and clinical diagnostic performance of 3 antigen detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) by using skin swab samples and upper-respiratory swab samples from mpox patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the United Kingdom. The analytical limit of detection was 1.0 × 10
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.