Skip to main content

Table 1 Estimates of malaria parasitemia prevalence among rapid diagnostic test negative samples by individual and one-step pooled testing by quantitative polymerase chain reaction

From: Novel application of one-step pooled molecular testing and maximum likelihood approaches to estimate the prevalence of malaria parasitaemia among rapid diagnostic test negative samples in western Kenya

Study area

qPCR testing strategy

Prevalence estimation method

Samples or pools tested, N

Positive, n

Pool size

Sensitivity,

% (95% CI)

Specificity,

% (95% CI)

Prevalence,

% (95% CI)

Asembo

Individual

Binomial

1735

189

1

ref.

ref.

10.9 (9.5–12.5)

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = sp = 1

347

116

5

79.2 (72.5–85.8)

99.0 (97.7–100.0)

7.8 (6.4–9.2)

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = 0.792, sp = 0.990

347

116

5

  

10.2 (8.2–12.1)a

Gem

Individual

Binomial

2145

303

1

ref.

ref.

14.1 (12.7–15.7)

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = sp = 1

429

164

5

73.7 (67.9–79.6)

98.1 (96.3–99.9)

9.2 (7.8–10.5)

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = 0.737, sp = 0.981

429

164

5

  

13.2 (10.9–15.5)a

Karemo

Individual

Binomial

790

145

1

ref.

ref.

18.4 (15.8–21.2)

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = sp = 1

158

73

5

69.6 (60.7–78.5)

96.4 (91.6–100.0)

11.7 (9.1–14.2)

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = 0.696, sp = 0.964

158

73

5

  

18.7 (13.3–24.1)a

Overall

Individual

Binomial

4670

637

1

ref.

ref.

14.5 (13.6–15.3) b

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = sp = 1

934

353

5

74.5 (70.5–78.5)

98.3 (97.1–99.5)

9.5 (8.5–10.5) b

 

One-step pooled

MLE, se = 0.745, sp = 0.983

934

353

5

  

13.9 (12.6–15.2) a,b

  1. CI  confidence interval, MLE  maximum likelihood estimation, qPCR  quantitative polymerase chain reaction, ref = reference, Se  sensitivity, Sp  specificity
  2. aAssumes fixed estimates of sensitivity and specificity denoted under prevalence estimation method
  3. bWeights were applied to overall estimates to account for differential sampling rates by area