6 research outputs found

    Trends in malaria prevalence by diagnostic method among the study participants that did not develop clinical malaria during the 112-day study.

    No full text
    <p>At every visit, malaria prevalences are highest when detected by <i>Pf</i>HRP-2 ELISA and qRT-PCR methods and lowest when measured with microscopy and <i>p</i>LDH ELISA.</p

    Utility of microscopy, qPCR, PfHRP-2 and pLDH ELISAs in predicting clinical episodes.

    No full text
    <p>Parasite dynamics before clinical malaria attack (<b>day 0</b>) as measured by (A) <i>Pf</i>HRP-2, (B) <i>p</i>LDH (C) Microscopy and (D) qPCR, for the 12 participants with microscopically confirmed clinical malaria. Parasite dynamics after clinical attack are also presented for <i>Pf</i>HRP-2 (A). Error bars represent standard error of mean of the parasitemia values at each time point. The arrows indicate the day of treatment. Microscopy, <i>p</i>LDH and qPCR did not detect malaria parasites after the treatment.</p

    Comparison of routine microscopy, <i>p</i>LDH/<i>Pf</i>HRP-2 ELISA and qPCR for a group of study participants who had acute blood smears prepared at sick visits.

    No full text
    <p>Each column (1–38) represents one blood sample with the corresponding microscopy, <i>p</i>LDH/<i>Pf</i>HRP-2 ELISA and qRT-PCR results, ordered by parasite density as determined by microscopy (top graph) and antigen levels (<i>p</i>LDH/<i>Pf</i>HRP-2) or Ct values (qPCR). As the levels of parasitemia decreases, the concordance between the different methods also decreases. <i>Pf</i>HRP-2 and qPCR detect parasites densities way beyond the detection limit of microscopy.</p

    The number and percentage of <i>Plasmodium</i> parasite species detected by microscopy and qPCR.

    No full text
    <p>Key: Pf = <i>P. falciparum</i>, Pm = <i>P. malariae</i>, Po = <i>P. ovale</i>.</p
    corecore