ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Clinical diagnostic accuracy of the HIV rapid test ACCU-TELL anti-HIV 1 + 2 in sub-Saharan African region.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is still a major health challenge. Around 1.5 million people are newly infected with HIV in the world every year. Screening and identification of HIV infected individuals is a major health challenge in the management of this pandemic. The last decades have seen the development and deployment of HIV Rapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs). These tests present numerous advantages in the management of HIV and are suitable in resource-limited settings. Unfortunately, many RDTs are deployed in low and middle income countries without primary evaluation in this setting. The current work evaluated the accuracy of Accu-Tell HIV rapid test in Sub-Saharan setting. We have performed a cross-sectional prospective study and included all patients visiting the national laboratory of public health in Libreville, Gabon, for a period of three months. We have selected RecombiLISA HIV1 + 2 Ab ELISA as gold standard. We have also included Determine HIV-1/2 Ag/Ab Combo as a control validated and recommended rapid test. Seven hundred forty-four participants visited our laboratory for HIV testing during the three-months study period with a mean age of 34 (SD: 14%) years old. ELISA and rapid tests (Determine and Accu-Tell) were performed on all study participants. 57, 61 and 62 participants were found positive for Accu-Tell, Determine and ELISA, respectively. For a sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 99%, respectively, Accu-Tell registered four (04) false positive and nine (09) false negative results. We observed six (06) false positive and seven (07) false negative results with Determine for a sensitivity and specificity of 90 and 99%, respectively. Accu-Tell and Determine have similar accuracy in detecting HIV infection in our setting. We have unfortunately observed a strong cross reaction between HIV1 and HIV2 with Accu-Tell. This test may not be used to differentiate HIV1 and HIV2.
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.