ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2025
Sweat conductivity test - can it be a cheaper alternative to sweat chloride analysis for diagnosis of cystic fibrosis in low resource setting?
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & objectives Availability of sweat chloride analysis, the gold standard test for diagnosis of Cystic Fibrosis (CF) faces significant challenges in India. This study aimed to compare sweat conductivity using Sweat-Chek™ Sweat Analyzer against sweat chloride analysis using the 926 Sherwood chloride analyser and assess if sweat conductivity test can guide CF diagnosis in resource-poor settings. Methods In this retrospective study sweat chloride analysis and sweat conductivity were simultaneously performed on samples collected via Macroduct® system from patients referred for sweat testing. CF diagnosis was based on sweat chloride levels: ≥60 mmol/l confirmed CF, 30-59 mmol/l was borderline, and <30 mmol/l excluded CF. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), and area under curve (AUC) were calculated via ROC curve. Spearman's rho was employed to analyse the correlation between methods. Results Both tests were performed on 118 children of which 106 samples were adequately collected. CF was diagnosed in 11 children. Sweat conductivity ≥ 80 mmol/l diagnosed CF with 100 per cent sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV. Likewise, a value ≤ 49 mmol/l predicted absence of CF with 100 per cent sensitivity, 91.36 per cent specificity, 78.13 per cent PPV, and 100 per cent NPV. Spearman's rho of 0.93 (P< 0.001) showed a strong correlation between the two methods. Intermediate conductivity values also correlated well (rs 0.62, P< 0.003) with intermediate sweat chloride levels. Interpretations & conclusions Sweat conductivity reliably identified CF in the study population including those children with borderline levels, suggesting the possibility of its use in resource-limited settings where sweat chloride analyzers are unavailable.
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.