ArticlePLOS global public health2026
High transmission risk of Human Immunodeficiency Virus in blood transfusions: A critical evaluation of blood bank serological tests in Mozambique.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many settings in sub-Saharan Africa use rapid antibody assays to detect human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among blood donor candidates. This study aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of HIV serological tests used to screen blood donor candidates in Mozambique. Determine HIV 1/2 + Uni-Gold HIV (the routine HIV testing at blood banks in Mozambique), and two newer rapid tests (Determine HIV Early Detect and Meriscreen HIV1-2 Western Blot) were compared with an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays (Merilisa HIV Gen 4 test + Uni-Gold HIV). Additionally, all serological tests were compared with the molecular cobas MPX test. The sensitivity and specificity of Determine HIV 1/2 + Uni-Gold HIV; Determine HIV Early Detect, and Meriscreen HIV1-2 Western Blot compared to the Merilisa HIV Gen 4 test + Uni-Gold were 85.5% and 99.6%; 88.7% and 99.5%; 90.0% and 99.6% respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of Determine HIV 1/2 + Uni-Gold HIV; Determine HIV Early Detect, Meriscreen HIV1-2 Western Blot, and Merilisa HIV Gen 4 test + Uni-Gold compared to the cobas MPX test were 64.0% and 99.1%; 68.6% and 99.1%; 70.8% and 99.0%; 66.0% and 99.4%, respectively. The probability of undetected positive results in the rapid tests and Merilisa HIV Gen 4 test ranged from 5.6 to 6.7 per 1,000 blood donors. The results of this study point to the need for the introduction of molecular testing for HIV in blood banks in developing countries to improve transfusion safety and contribute to controlling HIV as a public health problem.
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.