| Title |
The Evaluation of a Rapid In Situ HIV Confirmation Test in a Programme with a High Failure Rate of the WHO HIV Two-Test Diagnostic Algorithm
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, February 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0004351 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Derryck B. Klarkowski, Joseph M. Wazome, Kamalini M. Lokuge, Leslie Shanks, Clair F. Mills, Daniel P. O'Brien |
| Abstract |
Concerns about false-positive HIV results led to a review of testing procedures used in a Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) HIV programme in Bukavu, eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. In addition to the WHO HIV rapid diagnostic test algorithm (RDT) (two positive RDTs alone for HIV diagnosis) used in voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) sites we evaluated in situ a practical field-based confirmation test against western blot WB. In addition, we aimed to determine the false-positive rate of the WHO two-test algorithm compared with our adapted protocol including confirmation testing, and whether weakly reactive compared with strongly reactive rapid test results were more likely to be false positives. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 12% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 33% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Engineering | 9 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 16% |