Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33176236›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2020

Analytical sensitivity and clinical sensitivity of the three rapid antigen detection kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Gannon Ck Mak, Stephen Sy Lau, Kitty Ky Wong, Nancy Ls Chow, C S Lau, Edman Tk Lam, Rickjason Cw Chan, Dominic Nc Tsang

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Lateral Flow Immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Clinical sensitivity of rapid antigen test during a COVID-19 outbreak in Taipei, May to June 2021.Journal of the Formosan Medical Association = Taiwan yi zhi · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Gannon Ck MakAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China. Electronic address: so_phls10@dh.gov.hk.
Stephen Sy LauAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Kitty Ky WongAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Nancy Ls ChowAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
C S LauAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Edman Tk LamAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Rickjason Cw ChanAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Dominic Nc TsangAll from Microbiology Division, Public Health Laboratory Services Branch, Centre for Health Protection, Department of Health, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous rapid antigen detection (RAD) kits for diagnosing COVID-19 patients are available in the market recently.

objectiveTo compare analytical sensitivity and clinical sensitivity for the three commercially available RAD kits. STUDY

designAnalytical sensitivity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus was determined by limit of detection (LOD) using RT-PCR as a reference method. Clinical sensitivity was evaluated by using respiratory specimens collected from confirmed COVID-19 patients.

resultsThe LOD results showed that the three RAD kits varied from 10

conclusionsAlthough RAD kits were less sensitive than RT-PCR, understanding the clinical characteristics of different RAD kits can guide us to obtain suitable specimens for testing. The likelihood of positive results for RAD kits will be higher.

Indexed as

Antigens, ViralCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingCOVID-19 Serological TestingHumansLimit of DetectionNasopharynxReagent Kits, DiagnosticSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificityTime FactorsAntigens, ViralReagent Kits, Diagnostic2019 novel coronavirusCOVID-19Rapid antigen detectionRT-PCRSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33176236
PMCPMC7598567

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.