ArticleAmerican journal of infection control2019
Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus intermittent positive cases: Implications for infection control.
Article in American journal of infection control, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- What is the burden of asymptomatic coronavirus infections?New microbes and new infections · 2023Article
- Maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19 infection, Santa Teresa Hospital, Comayagua, Honduras. Case seriesRevista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · 2022Article
- MERS-CoV Confirmation among 6,873 suspected persons and relevant Epidemiologic and Clinical Features, Saudi Arabia - 2014 to 2019.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- The role of lung ultrasound as a frontline diagnostic tool in the era of COVID-19 outbreak.Internal and emergency medicine · 2021Article
- The diagnosis of SARS-CoV2 pneumonia: A review of laboratory and radiological testing results.Journal of medical virology · 2020Review
- Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020Review
- The diagnosis of pandemic coronavirus pneumonia: A review of radiology examination and laboratory test.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2020Review
- Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection based on CT scan vs RT-PCR: reflecting on experience from MERS-CoV.The Journal of hospital infection · 2020Article
- Middle East respiratory syndrome.Lancet (London, England) · 2020Review
- Improving Detection Efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Testing.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Article
- Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus in the last two years: Health care workers still at risk.American journal of infection control · 2019Article
- Call to action for improved case definition and contact tracing for MERS-CoV.Journal of travel medicine · 2019Article
- New and emerging infectious diseases (Ebola, Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome coronavirus, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, Candida auris): Focus on environmental survival and germicide susceptibility.American journal of infection control · 2019Review
- A Review of Asymptomatic and Subclinical Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Infections.Epidemiologic reviews · 2019Review
- COVID-19 isolation strategies: What have we learned.Travel medicine and infectious diseaseArticle
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMiddle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) continues to be reported from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Data on the phenomenon of intermittent positive results for MERS-CoV on reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with negative results in between are lacking. Here we describe cases with intermittent positive MERS-CoV test results and highlight the required number of tests to rule out or rule in MERS-CoV infection based on a large retrospective cohort of patients with confirmed MERS-CoV.
methodsThis analysis included cases admitted between January 2014 and December 2017. The included patients had a minimum of 3 nasopharyngeal MERS-CoV RT-PCR tests for confirmation and needed 2 negative samples for MERS-CoV evaluated 48 hours apart with clinical improvement or stabilization apart to ensure clearance.
resultsA total of 408 patients with positive MERS-CoV test results were treated at the referring hospital. We excluded 72 patients who had only 1 swab result available in the system and were treated in the initial years of the disease. Of the remaining 336 patients, 300 (89%) had a positive result after 1 swab, 324 (96.5%) had a positive result after 2 consecutive swabs, and 328 (97.6%) had a positive result after 3 consecutive swabs. Of the total cases, 46 (13.7%) had a positive MERS-CoV test then a negative test, followed by positive test results.
conclusionsOur data indicate that 2 to 3 nasopharyngeal samples are needed to produce the highest yield of positive results for MERS-CoV. In addition, 2 negative results 48 hours apart with clinical improvement or stabilization are needed to clear patients from MERS-CoV. Evaluation of the yield of sputum samples is needed to assess the effectiveness against nasopharyngeal swabs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.