ArticleFrontiers in public health2020
Self-Sampling of Oropharyngeal Swabs Among Healthcare Workers for Molecular Detection of Respiratory Viruses: A Valuable Approach for Epidemiological Studies and Surveillance Programs.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed at assessing the validity of self-collected (self-sampled) oropharyngeal (OP) swabs among healthcare workers compared to those collected by trained sentinel general practitioners (GP-sampled) from individuals with influenza-like illness (ILI), to be implemented in epidemiological studies and/or surveillance programs of viral pathogens involved in community respiratory infections. In our study, OP swabs were collected from adults (>18 years) with ILI during the 2018-2019 influenza season. Two groups of samples were considered: group 1-131 self-sampled OP swabs collected by healthcare workers after being trained on the sampling procedure; group 2-131 GP-sampled OP swabs collected from outpatients by sentinel GPs operating within the Italian Influenza Surveillance Network. To assess swabbing quality, following RNA extraction, each sample was tested for the presence of the human ribonuclease P gene (RNP) by in-house real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Samples with a cycle threshold (Ct) <35 were considered adequate for further virological analysis. Influenza viruses (IVs), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and rhinovirus (RV) genomes were detected by in-house real-time RT-PCR. All samples were positive to RNP detection with Ct <35. The mean Ct value was similar in the two groups (group 1 vs. group 2: 25.93 ± 2.22 vs. 25.46 ± 2.40;
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.