ArticleJournal of medical virology2021
Over 90% of clinical swabs used for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics contain sufficient nucleic acid concentrations.
Article in Journal of medical virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discrepancy between frequent occurrence of COVID-19-like symptoms and low seroconversion rates among healthcare workers.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- A rapid test recognizing mucosal SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies distinguishes prodromal from convalescent COVID-19.iScience · 2021Article
- Over 90% of clinical swabs used for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics contain sufficient nucleic acid concentrations.Journal of medical virology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), reliable diagnostics are absolutely indispensable. Molecular SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics based on nucleic acids (NA) derived from oro- or nasopharyngeal swabs constitute the current gold standard. Given the importance of test results, it is crucial to assess the quality of the underlying swab samples and NA extraction procedures. We determined NA concentrations in clinical samples used for SARS-CoV-2 testing applying an NA-specific dye. In comparison to cut-offs defined by SARS-CoV-2-positive samples, internal positive controls, and references from a federal laboratory, 90.85% (923 of 1016) of swabs contained NA concentrations enabling SARS-CoV-2 recognition. Swabs collected by local health authorities and the central emergency department either had significantly higher NA concentrations or were less likely to exhibit insufficient quality, arguing in favor of sampling centers with routined personnel. Interestingly, samples taken from females had significantly higher NA concentrations than those from males. Among eight longitudinal patient sample sets with intermitting negative quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction results, two showed reduced NA concentrations in negative specimens. The herein described fluorescence-based NA quantification approach is immediately applicable to evaluate swab qualities, optimize sampling strategies, identify patient-specific differences, and explain some peculiar test results including intermittent negative samples with low NA concentrations.
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.