Evaluation of Three Rapid Diagnostic Test Kits in the Diagnosis of <i>Plasmodium</i> Species Infections among Primary School Children in Baringo County, Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Due to the difficulty in implementing microscopy-based definitive diagnosis of malaria especially in resource-poor areas, rapid diagnostic test (RDT) kits as alternatives have been developed by different companies. Kits from different companies may differ in sensitivity and specificity. It is therefore imperative to conduct field evaluation of kits from different manufacturers before they are recommended for widespread use in diagnosis of malaria. The present study sought to evaluate the performance of malaria RDT kits from two manufacturers against microscopy in detection of Plasmodium spp. infections among primary school children in Baringo County, Kenya. Methods: Two cross-sectional comparative surveys to assess three RDT kits (CareStart HRP-2, SD Bioline Ag-Pf and SD Bioline Ag-Pf/Pan) were conducted on 561 pupils from three primary schools within the Kerio Valley of Baringo County, Kenya. Results: A total of 561 blood samples were tested for Plasmodium spp. within a period of four months. SD Bioline Ag-Pf/ Pan RDT kit had a higher sensitivity (90%) compared to that of CareStart HRP-2 (70%) but this was not statistically significant (McNemar’s χ2 = 0.5, df = 1, p = 0.4795). The sensitivity of SD Bioline Ag-Pf was the same as that of Care Start HRP-2 (82.4%). The number of positive samples by microscopy was relatively lower than those detected by RDT kits. Two cases of non-P. falciparum infections were detected by RDT kits during the second survey. Conclusion: The results of the present study suggest that the performance of the three kits in the diagnosis of P. falciparum infections was better than microscopy. The sensitivity of SD Bioline Ag-Pf/Pan was slightly greater than that of Care Start HRP-2, although not statistically different.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.435 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".