Kolaczinski 2004.
Clinical features and settings |
Presenting signs and symptoms: Suspected malaria/febrile illness Previous treatment for malaria: No exclusion criteria based on previous use of antimalarials, and no data on previous antimalarial use of the participants was presented Clinical setting: Basic health units within an Afghan refugee camp Country: Pakistan (North West Frontier Province) Malaria endemicity: Not stated Malaria endemic species: 80% P. vivax, 20%P. falciparum |
|
Participants |
Sample size: 499 Age: All age groups eligible for inclusion; actual age range of the participants not stated Sex: Both males and females eligible for inclusion; actual age range of the participants not stated Co‐morbidities and pregnancy: No exclusions based on co‐morbidities or pregnancy, and no data presented on the frequency of these conditions in the study population Parasite density of microscopy positive cases: Not presented |
|
Study design | Enrollment was consecutive and prospective. One RDT was tested. | |
Target condition and reference standard(s) |
Target condition: Malaria parasitaemia Reference standard: Microscopy thick and thin blood films Person(s) performing microscopy: Microscopists Microscopy setting: Basic health units within an Afghan refugee camp and HNI's reference laboratory in Peshawar Number of high power fields examined before declaring negative: 100 Number of observer or repeats: Two, one at the BHU and one at the reference laboratory Resolution of discrepancies between observers: Not clear, "all of the smears checked by the microscopist at each BHU were cross checked at HNI's reference laboratory at Pashawar" |
|
Index and comparator tests |
Commerical name of RDT: OptiMAL (DiaMed AG, Cressier, Switzerland) Parasite(s) designed to detect:P. falciparum or mixed infection, non‐falciparum malaria species only Designated Type: Type 4 Batch numbers: Not stated Transport and storage conditions: Not described Person(s) performing RDT: Microscopists RDT setting: Basic health units |
|
Follow‐up | Not applicable | |
Notes | Source of funding: Not stated | |
Table of Methodological Quality | ||
Item | Authors' judgement | Description |
Representative spectrum? All tests | Yes | Participants were a consecutive series of patients attending a basic health unit with suspected malaria |
Acceptable reference standard? All tests | Yes | Two microscopists, one working in a central laboratory, viewed at least 100 high power fields before declaring a slide negative |
Partial verification avoided? All tests | Yes | All participants who received the index test also received the reference test |
Differential verification avoided? All tests | Yes | The same reference test was used regardless of the index test results |
Incorporation avoided? All tests | Yes | The index test does not form part of the reference standard |
Reference standard results blinded? All tests | No | The index test and reference test were undertaken by the same person |
Index test results blinded? All tests | No | The index test and reference test were undertaken by the same person |
Uninterpretable results reported? All tests | Unclear | The number of participants originally enrolled in the study was clearly stated, and corresponded to the number presented in the analysis; therefore there were no exclusions due to invalid test results |
Withdrawals explained? All tests | Yes | The number of participants originally enrolled in the study was clearly stated, and corresponded to the number presented in the analysis; therefore there were no withdrawals |