ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2023
Development of a simple, rapid, and sensitive molecular diagnostic assay for cholera.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of a Simple and Rapid Diagnostic Test RLDT for the Detection of Cholera in Bangladesh.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Controlled immobilization of single-domain antibodies using cellulose-binding modules for ABRSC advances · 2026Article
- Dynamics of IgM and IgA Antibody Response Profile AgainstInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Prospective evaluation of different faecal preservation media for travellers' diarrhoea diagnostic application with multiplex PCR BioFire FilmArray in resource-limited settings.Journal of medical microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cholera continues to inflict high rates of morbidity and mortality. Prompt identification of cholera cases facilitates rapid outbreak responses in the short term while providing reliable surveillance data to guide long-term policies and interventions. Microbiological stool culture, the current recognized gold standard for diagnosing cholera, has significant limitations. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) represent promising alternatives for diagnosing cholera in areas with limited laboratory infrastructure. However, studies conducted with the current cholera RDTs demonstrated wide variations in sensitivity and specificity. To address this gap in the diagnosis of cholera, we developed a simple, rapid, and sensitive diagnostic assay, "Rapid LAMP based Diagnostic Test (RLDT)." With a novel, simple sample preparation method directly from the fecal samples along with lyophilized reaction strips and using established Loop-mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) platform, cholera toxin gene (ctxA) and O1 (O1rfb) gene could be detected in less than an hour. Cholera RLDT assay is cold chain and electricity-free. To avoid any end-user bias, a battery-operated, handheld reader was used to read the RLDT results. The performance specifications of the cholera RLDT assay, including analytical sensitivity and specificity, were evaluated using direct fecal samples, dried fecal samples on filter paper, and environmental water samples spiked with cholera strain. The limit of detection (LOD) was ~104 CFU/gm of stool for both ctxA and O1 genes, corresponding to about 1 CFU of Vibrio cholerae per reaction within 40 minutes. The LOD was 10 bacteria per ml of environmental water when tested with RLDT directly, without enrichment. Being simple, RLDT has the potential to be applied in resource-poor endemic settings for rapid, sensitive, and reliable diagnosis of cholera.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.