ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2021
Validation of SARS CoV-2 detection by real-time PCR in matched pooled and deconvoluted clinical samples before and after nucleic acid extraction: a study in tertiary care hospital of North India.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of the Effective Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Sample Pooling Based on a Large-Scale Screening Experience: Retrospective Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Alternate Approach in Storing and Shipment of SARS-CoV-2 RNA Samples with the Use of FTA Cards.Current microbiology · 2022Article
- Evaluation of sample pooling using the SAMBA II SARS-CoV-2 test.Journal of virological methods · 2022Article
- An improvement of current hypercube pooling PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Pooled Testing Strategies for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis: A comprehensive review.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2021Review
- Sample pooling: burden or solution?Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) relies on the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) RNA by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction in respiratory samples. Rapid increase in the COVID-19 cases across the world requires fast and efficient testing as testing capacity is a bottleneck in diagnosis. In this context, pooling strategy can be opted for rapid testing in a cost-effective manner. In this study, the authors have optimized and compared the effect of pooling (5 and 10 samples) before and after nucleic acid extraction. It was concluded that there was no significant difference in the SARS CoV-2 RNA detection in the pools prepared at sample or RNA level. Even after pooling, 10-fold dilution was detectable with 3-cycle threshold value change in both type of pools when compared with individual samples. Hence, sample pool size of 10 can be used in low-prevalent areas, and testing capacity can be substantially increased.
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.