ReviewEpidemiology and infection2025
Dengue fever diagnosis in resource-limited settings.
Review in Epidemiology and infection, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pediatric Dengue in the French Caribbean During an Epidemic.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Proof-of-Concept Machine Learning Framework for Arboviral Disease Classification Using Literature-Derived Synthetic Data: Methodological Development Preceding Clinical Validation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evolutionary history and transmission dynamics of dengue virus type 2 in Africa.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dengue is an arboviral infection that poses a substantial public health concern, with early diagnosis being a critical factor in effective management. However, limited diagnostic expertise in developing countries contributes to the under-reporting of dengue cases. This review compares the accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and the tourniquet test (TT) in diagnosing dengue fever (DF) in non-laboratory-based settings. Relevant original articles on the use of RDTs and TT for dengue diagnosis were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. The STARD and QUADAS-2 tools were employed to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Search terms included combinations of 'fever', 'dengue', and '"diagnosis'. In total, 23 articles were eligible for inclusion. The RDTs demonstrated mean sensitivities and specificities of 76.2% (SD = 13.8) and 91.5% (SD = 10.3), respectively, while the TT showed mean sensitivity and specificity values of 48.6% (SD = 24.9) and 79.5% (SD = 14.9), respectively. Overall, RDTs exhibited superior diagnostic performance compared to the TT. Our findings suggest that the TT is an inadequate stand-alone diagnostic tool for dengue. RDTs should be prioritized for dengue diagnosis in resource-limited settings. However, in situations where RDTs are unavailable, the TT may serve as a supplementary option.
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.