Table 3.

Malaria Parasitological Assessment.

Parasite Positivity	VISIT 1 n (%)	DELIVERY n (%)	P value
MIC	22 (4.3)	7 (2.4)	0.1666
Geometric mean parasite density (parasites/µL)	909	143
Subjects assessed	515	293
mRDT	46 (8.8)	10 (3.4)	0.0034γ
Subjects assessed	520	292
PCR	129 (25.0)	134 (43.4)	0.0001ρ
Subjects assessed	517	309
Positive Diagnosis Correlation
MIC vs mRDT	13 (2.5)	1 (0.34)	0.001 µ
MIC vs PCR	15 (2.9)	1 (0.32)	0.001∞
mRDT vs PCR	39 (7.5)	5 (1.7)	0.001∑
MIC vs mRDT vs PCR	12 (2.3)	Nil
Negative Diagnosis Correlation
MIC vs mRDT	94 (19.8)	106 (38.8)	0.000a
MIC vs PCR	5 (1.1)	10 (3.7)	0.017b
mRDT vs PCR	9 (1.9)	12 (4.4)	0.054
MIC vs mRDT vs PCR	366 (77.2)	145 (53.1)	0.003c
GravidityΩ
Primigravida	49 (34.5)	40 (28.4)	0.422
Multigravida	93 (65.5)	101 (71.6)	0.631

MIC – microscopy; RDT – rapid diagnostic test, PCR – polymerase chain reaction

^γ Statistically significant difference mRDT positivity rates at V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.003)

^ρ Statistically significant difference when comparing mRDT positivity rates at Visit 1 vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^µ Statistically significant difference is diagnosing capability V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^∞ Statistically significant difference is diagnosing capability V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^∑ Statistically significant difference is diagnosing capability V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^a Statistically significant difference is diagnosing capability V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^b Statistically significant difference is diagnosing capability V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^c Statistically significant difference is diagnosing capability V₁ vs Delivery using Pearson chi² test (p < 0.001)

^Ω Parasite diagnosis was made using any or all of microscopy, RDT & PCR