ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2026
Comparative Analysis of Molecular Detection Algorithms for Enhanced Dengue Surveillance: A Field Case Evaluation.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2026. 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
The BioFire® Global Fever Panel (GFP; BioFire Diagnostics, Salt Lake City, UT) is an assay designed for detecting multiple pathogens, including dengue virus (DENV; Orthoflavivirus denguei). Although its performance has been primarily assessed using composite reference standards (CRS) or through direct comparisons with other tests, its real-world accuracy remains uncertain. The performance of the GFP in combination with real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) testing is evaluated in the present study using dengue surveillance data from 224 individuals with acute fever (≤5 days) in a dengue-endemic area of the Peruvian Amazon. Dengue virus RNA was detected in serum and whole blood using qRT-PCR testing and the GFP, respectively. Two reference standards were developed: one based on CRS and another based on latent class analysis. The best latent class model (LCM) included a viral load surrogate. Using qRT-PCR testing or the LCM as a reference, the GFP exhibited a sensitivity of 94.5% (95% CI: 88.4-98.0%) and a specificity of 75.7% (95% CI: 66.8-83.2%). With CRS, the GFP displayed a sensitivity of 95.6% (95% CI: 90.7-98.4%) and 100% specificity. The simultaneous and sequential two-test algorithms for negative yielded comparable performance and exhibited high sensitivity compared with other two-test sequential algorithms. The sequential testing algorithm, which used qRT-PCR testing followed by the GFP for negative results, offered the best balance in cost, time, and performance (sensitivity: 99.3-100%; specificity: 75.7-100%). Although the GFP is more expensive than qRT-PCR testing, it offers a shorter turnaround time per sample. Overall, the findings suggest that the GFP is a reliable and high-performing tool for DENV testing, but its cost may restrict its use in resource-limited settings.
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.