ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2026
Assessing diagnostic accuracy of onchocerciasis rapid diagnostic tests using Bayesian latent class models.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOnchocerciasis elimination programs increasingly rely on rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) that detect antibodies to the Ov16 antigen, yet the performance of currently available rapid tests remains uncertain. The commercially available SD BIOLINE Ov16 RDT has shown inconsistent sensitivity when used on whole blood and does not consistently meet international performance thresholds for mapping or decisions to stop mass drug administration (MDA). Two novel onchocerciasis RDTs have been developed, DDTD RDT and GADx RDT, but their diagnostic accuracy has not been fully evaluated using methods that account for the absence of a true reference standard. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsWe pooled participant-level data from three field studies conducted in Mozambique, Ghana, and Benin in 2023 to evaluate two novel onchocerciasis RDTs and the commercially available SD BIOLINE Ov16 RDT. A Bayesian latent class model was used to estimate diagnostic sensitivity and specificity without assuming any test was a perfect reference standard. Across all model specifications, the GADx rapid test showed the highest sensitivity, with posterior median estimates (92.0%-92.8%) consistently above the 89% threshold recommended for decisions to stop mass drug administration (MDA). Posterior median sensitivity for the SD BIOLINE test was above this threshold in most models but below it under the field-based prior (83.2%). The DDTD RDT demonstrated lower sensitivity overall (86.6%-88.4%). Specificity estimates were consistently high for all tests but remained below the recommended threshold of 99.8% (highest median: 98.8%). Alternative definitions of a positive result for the multi-antigen DDTD RDT did not meaningfully alter its estimated performance. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In the study communities sampled, the two novel onchocerciasis RDTs generally yielded higher sensitivity estimates than the commercially available SD BIOLINE Ov16 RDT, with the GADx assay having the highest estimated sensitivity. However, posterior estimates for none of the evaluated tests reached the specificity threshold recommended to support decisions to stop MDA on their own. These findings highlight the need for improved diagnostic tools or complementary testing strategies to support elimination decision-making.
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.