Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40546351›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS

Traditional versus reverse algorithm for diagnosis of syphilis - An Indian perspective from a national referral laboratory for sexually transmitted infections.

Shiva Verma, Pragyan Swagatika Panda, Sumathi Muralidhar, Santhosh Rajan, Niti Khunger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shiva VermaDepartment of Microbiology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Pragyan Swagatika PandaDepartment of Microbiology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Sumathi MuralidharApex Regional STD Centre and SRL-HIV, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Santhosh RajanDepartment of Microbiology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Niti KhungerDepartment of Dermatology, Apex Regional STD Centre, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Syphilis diagnosis can be confirmed by two testing algorithms. In the traditional algorithm, a nontreponemal test is used as a screening test to rule out syphilis which, if reactive, is confirmed by a treponemal test. In the reverse algorithm, a treponemal test is used as a screening test, which, if positive, is confirmed by a nontreponemal test. If the nontreponemal is negative, a second treponemal assay of a different principle is performed to resolve the discordant result. The aim of this study was to compare the traditional and reverse algorithms for the diagnosis of syphilis in a National Referral Apex Centre for Sexually Transmitted Infections. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was done on samples received from male and female sexually transmitted infection clinics for syphilis testing. All samples were tested simultaneously using the Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL), Results: The reverse algorithm showed a significantly higher seroprevalence of syphilis than the traditional algorithm (62.4% vs. 40.8%, Conclusions: This study supports the use of reverse algorithms for diagnosing syphilis in high-prevalence populations.

Indexed as

Reverse algorithmsyphilis screening algorithmsyphilis serodiagnosisTreponema pallidum hemagglutination assayVenereal Disease Research Laboratory

Identifiers

PMID40546351
PMCPMC12180856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.