ArticleScientific reports2026
Diagnostic gaps in light microscopy for malaria case management and control in Dilla Zuria Health Facility, southern Ethiopia.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malaria misdiagnosis has important clinical and public health consequences, including inappropriate treatment, missed infections, ongoing transmission, and weakened malaria control efforts. This study aimed to identify light-microscope misdiagnoses that may affect malaria case management and control efforts. A single-gate design study was conducted among 474 cases attending Dilla Zuria Health Facility. Venous blood samples were examined by light microscopy and subjected to a qPCR assay, which detects Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax infections. The level of misdiagnosis, determined using qPCR as the reference standard, is summarized with descriptive statistics. Diagnostic performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, accuracy, and kappa statistics, were calculated. Using qPCR as the confirmatory reference, the variation between onsite light microscopic diagnoses and qPCR was 24.7% (95/384) for positive cases and 18.8% (17/90) for negative cases. Moreover, the variation documented between onsite light microscopic diagnoses of P. falciparum was 21% (48/228) compared with qPCR, it was 28.3% (32/113) for P. vivax, and 34.8% (15/43) for P. falciparum and P. vivax mixed infection. Notably, 18.8% of microscopy-negative cases were qPCR-positive, possibly due to submicroscopic infections, inadequately prepared blood smears, or incorrectly read blood smears. Malaria diagnosis still relies on microscopy, but low-density and mixed infections are often missed, leading to misdiagnosis and continued transmission. Structured, competency-based, and regular training combined with robust quality assurance is essential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, optimize malaria case management, and support Ethiopia's ongoing efforts toward malaria control.
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.