ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Comparison of Cobas Plasma Separation Cards and Whatman filter paper cards versus conventional serum samples for anti-Trypansoma cruzi antibody detection.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosis of chronic Trypanosoma cruzi infection relies on serological techniques using invasive blood samples (serum or plasma), which can be impractical in remote areas. Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling offer advantages over invasive samples in terms of ease of collection (finger prick), transport and storage. This study aimed to compare the performance of anti-T. cruzi antibody detection from DBS samples collected on two different devices: Whatman cards and Cobas Plasma Separation Cards (PSC). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsA prospective study using 382 paired serum and whole blood samples was conducted. Whole blood were used to obtain DBS collected on Whatman and PSC cards. All samples were tested for IgG anti-T. cruzi using the Elecsys Chagas assay, with serum serving as the gold standard. Both DBS collection systems showed high concordance with serum samples (>96%). However, antibody index values detected in DBS samples were lower than those detected in serum samples (p < 0.05). Qualitative results from DBS were highly concordant between the collection systems, with only two discrepancies (2/382), both positive on Whatman and negative on PSC. Antibody index values from Whatman-collected samples were higher than those from PSC-collected samples (median 96.45 vs. 63.33; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: DBS sampling is a feasible alternative to invasive blood collection, particularly in settings with limited access to health systems. Both DBS-collection devices showed high diagnostic accuracy; however, the lower antibody index values from PSC-collected samples may compromise the sensitivity of the technique in samples with a low antibody index.
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.