↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy and reliability of an NS1 rapid immunochromatographic test for DENV-1 diagnosis at point of care and in the laboratory

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Accuracy and reliability of an NS1 rapid immunochromatographic test for DENV-1 diagnosis at point of care and in the laboratory
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2679-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Verónica Elizabeth Mata, Sonia Regina Lambert Passos, Yara Hahr Marques Hökerberg, Guilherme Miguéis Berardinelli, Maria Angelica Borges dos Santos, Levy Vilas Boas Fukuoka, Anna Carolina Fontoura Seixas Rangel Maciel, Cintia Damasceno dos Santos Rodrigues, Aline da Silva Santos, Raquel de Vasconcellos Carvalhaes de Oliveira

Abstract

Rapid immunochromatographic tests (ICT) for dengue non-structural protein 1 (NS1) have shown good performance for diagnosing acute-phase dengue in serum in laboratory settings, but rarely have been assessed in whole blood and at point of care (POC). This study compare the accuracy and inter- and intra-observer reliability of the NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT in whole blood at POC versus serum in the laboratory, during a DENV-1 epidemic. Cross-sectional study involving 144 adults spontaneously demanding care in an emergency department within 4 days of onset of acute febrile illness. Accuracy of NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT was compared in whole blood and serum, both at 15 and 30 min, blinded to the reference RT-PCR or NS1 ELISA. Non-dengue patients were also tested for Zika virus with RT-PCR. Reliability of whole blood and serum readings by the same or different observers was measured by simple kappa (95% CI). At 15 min, sensitivity (Sn) of NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT in whole blood/POC was 76.7% (95% CI: 68.0-84.1) and specificity (Sp) was 87.0% (95% CI: 66.4-97.2). Sn in serum/laboratory was 82% (95% CI: 74.1-88.6) and Sp 100% (95% CI: 85.8-100). Positive likelihood ratio was 5.9 (95% CI: 2.0-17.0) for whole blood/POC and 19.8 (95% CI: 2.9-135.1) for serum/laboratory. Reliability of matched readings of whole blood/POC and serum/laboratory by the same observer (k = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93) or different observers (k = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.72-0.92) was almost perfect, with higher discordant levels in the absence of dengue. Results did not differ statistically at 5%. NS1 Bioeasy™ ICT in DENV-1 epidemics is a potentially confirmatory test. Invalid results at 15 min should be reread at 30 min. To optimize impact of implementing ICT in the management of false-negatives it should be incorporated into an algorithm according to setting and available specimen. UTN U1111-1145-9451 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 22 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2017.
All research outputs
#20,446,373
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#6,518
of 7,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,890
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#138
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.