Truenat appears to be more sensitive than microscopy/RDT but when compared with nPCR, it seems that Truenat has miles to go, particularly for screening SMIs. Further, Nair et al. had strong competing interests: 6/10 authors being employees of the technology developer which also funded the study.2 Therefore, Truenat ’s performance must undergo unbiased evaluation on sufficient number of febrile patients and results replicated in varied malaria settings.
