ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2021
Mass Screening of Asymptomatic Persons for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Using Saliva.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
102 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 158 citations in OpenAlex.
- Double-Negative Results Matter: A Reevaluation of Sensitivities for Detecting SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Saliva Versus Nasopharyngeal Swabs.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Pooled it
- SARS-CoV-2 saliva testing using RT-PCR: a systematic review.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Is saliva collected passively without forceful coughing sensitive to detect SARS-CoV-2 in ambulatory cases? A systematic review.Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2022Pooled it
- The diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR from self-collected saliva versus nasopharyngeal sampling: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Saudi medical journal · 2022Pooled it
- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Diagnostic Tests for Border Screening During the Very Early Phase of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Performance of Saliva, Oropharyngeal Swabs, and Nasal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Detection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Pooled it
- The Sensitivity and Costs of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Saliva Versus Nasopharyngeal Swabs : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of Saliva and Nasopharyngeal Swab Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing for Detection of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Screening for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR: Saliva or nasopharyngeal swab? Rapid review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Rapid Recovery From SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Immunocompromised Children Despite Limited Neutralizing Antibody Response: A Virologic and Sero-Immunologic Analysis of a Single-Center Cohort.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Generation of recombinant viruses directly from clinical specimens of COVID-19 patients.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- COVID-19 monitoring of school personnel through molecular salivary test and dried blood spot analysis.Journal of global health · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluation of a new molecular test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in salivary samples.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2023Article
- Salivary SARS-CoV-2 RNA for diagnosis of COVID-19 patients: a systematic revisew and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.The Japanese dental science review · 2023Review
- Optimization and Improvement of qPCR Detection Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 in Saliva.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Comparison between Nasopharyngeal and Saliva Samples for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses in Children with Acute Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: A Pilot Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Extraction-free clinical detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus from saline gargle samples using Hamilton STARlet liquid handler.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- SARS-CoV-2 evolution among patients with immunosuppression in a nosocomial cluster of a Japanese medical center during the Delta (AY.29 sublineage) surge.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Investigation of the individual genetic evolution of SARS-CoV-2 in a small cluster during the rapid spread of the BF.5 lineage in Tokyo, Japan.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly evolved to become a global pandemic, largely owing to the transmission of its causative virus through asymptomatic carriers. Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in asymptomatic people is an urgent priority for the prevention and containment of disease outbreaks in communities. However, few data are available in asymptomatic persons regarding the accuracy of polymerase chain reaction testing. In addition, although self-collected saliva samples have significant logistical advantages in mass screening, their utility as an alternative specimen in asymptomatic persons is yet to be determined.
methodsWe conducted a mass screening study to compare the utility of nucleic acid amplification, such as reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, using nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and saliva samples from each individual in 2 cohorts of asymptomatic persons: the contact-tracing cohort and the airport quarantine cohort.
resultsIn this mass screening study including 1924 individuals, the sensitivities of nucleic acid amplification testing with NPS and saliva specimens were 86% (90% credible interval, 77%-93%) and 92% (83%-97%), respectively, with specificities >99.9%. The true concordance probability between the NPS and saliva tests was estimated at 0.998 (90% credible interval, .996-.999) given the recent airport prevalence of 0.3%. In individuals testing positive, viral load was highly correlated between NPS and saliva specimens.
conclusionBoth NPS and saliva specimens had high sensitivity and specificity. Self-collected saliva specimens are valuable for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in mass screening of asymptomatic persons.
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.