Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33211392›Full record

ReviewOral diseases2022

Salivary diagnostics of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19).

Evangelia Michailidou, Athanasios Poulopoulos, Georgios Tzimagiorgis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oral diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Ultrasensitive assay for saliva-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection.Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine · 2022
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

3 authors.

Evangelia MichailidouDepartment of Oral Medicine and Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Athanasios PoulopoulosDepartment of Oral Medicine and Maxillofacial Pathology, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6611-7506
Georgios TzimagiorgisLaboratory of Biological Chemistry, Medical School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLaboratory testing for the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the consequent respiratory coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is categorized into methods that detect the viral presence and methods that detect antibodies produced in the host as a response to infection. Methods that detect viral presence into the host excretions measure current infection by SARS-CoV-2, whereas the detection of human antibodies exploited against SARS-CoV-2 evaluates the past exposure to the virus.

objectiveThis review provides a comprehensive overview for the use of saliva as a specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2, the methods for the salivary diagnostics utilized till very recently, and the arisen considerations for the diagnosis of COVID-19 disease.

conclusionThe major advantage of using saliva as a specimen for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 is that saliva collection is a non-invasive method which produces no discomfort to the patient and permits the patients to utilize home self-sampling techniques in order to protect health providers from the exposure to the pathogen. There is an urgent need to increase the active research for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the saliva because the non-invasive salivary diagnostics may provide a reliable and cost-effective method suitable for the fast and early detection of COVID-19 infection.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansSalivaantibodiesCOVID-19diagnosissalivasalivary diagnosticsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33211392
PMCPMC7753835

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.