ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2019
Evaluating addition of self-collected throat swabs to nasal swabs for respiratory virus detection.
Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- ITGB4 Deficiency in Airway Epithelium Aggravates RSV Infection and Increases HDM Sensitivity.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Usability of an At-Home Anterior Nares SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Sample Collection Kit: Human Factors Feasibility Study.JMIR human factors · 2021Article
- Understanding and utilizing textile-based electrostatic flocking for biomedical applications.Applied physics reviews · 2021Review
- Accuracy and Acceptance of a Self-Collection Model for Respiratory Tract Infection Diagnostics: A Concise Clinical Literature Review.Journal of emergency nursing · 2021Review
- Home collection of nasal swabs for detection of influenza in the Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation Study.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2021Article
- Evolution of Specimen Self-Collection in the COVID-19 Era: Implications for Population Health Management of Infectious Disease.Population health management · 2021Review
- Self-Collected versus Healthcare Worker-Collected Swabs in the Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Reliability of self-sampling for accurate assessment of respiratory virus viral and immunologic kinetics.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEarly and accurate detection of respiratory viruses (RV) is important for patient management. We have previously shown that self-collected nasal swabs (NS) are feasible and as sensitive as clinician-collected nasal washes for detection of RV, but the additive benefit of self-collected throat swabs is unknown.
objectivesTo evaluate the added yield of self-collected nasal to throat swabs for detection of RV by PCR in patients with upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) symptoms. STUDY
designPatients with URTI symptoms self-collected paired polyurethane foam NS and nylon flocked throat swabs and completed a symptom survey. Swabs were tested for 12 RV by real-time reverse transcription (RT)-PCR. Descriptive, McNemar's, and Wilcoxon signed rank statistical tests were used.
results115 paired nasal and throat swabs were collected from 63 individuals, with 71/115 (62%) positive for a RV by at least one specimen, including 51 positive by both, 17 positive by NS only, and 3 positive by throat swab only. The sensitivity of NS was 96% (95%CI: 88-99) versus 76% (95% CI: 65-85) in throat swabs, p<0.001. The median PCR cycle threshold (Ct) in 51 concordant samples was lower (indicating higher viral concentration) in NS (25.1) versus throat swabs (32.0). The three samples positive only by throat swab had high Ct values (33.8, 36.2, and 38.8, all rhinovirus).
conclusionSelf-collection of NS was significantly more sensitive than self collection of throat swabs for detection of RV by RT-PCR. The addition of throat sampling does not appear to increase the diagnostic load in the self-testing setting.
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.