ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Test Groups, Not Individuals: A Review of the Pooling Approaches for SARS-CoV-2 Diagnosis.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- High prevalence group testing in epidemiology with geometrically inspired algorithms.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effect of swab pooling on the Accula point-of-care RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Strategies for Scaling up SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Testing Capacity.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Evaluation of FAST COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Test Kit for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Samples from Mildly Symptomatic or Asymptomatic Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pooling Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens to Improve Testing Capacity for SARS-CoV-2 by Real-Time RT-PCR.Biological procedures online · 2021Article
- Sample-Pooling Strategy for SARS-CoV-2 Detection among Students and Staff of the University of Sannio.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Massive molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis is mandatory to manage the spread of COVID-19. Diagnostic screening should be performed at a mass scale, extended to the asymptomatic population, and repeated over time. An accurate diagnostic pipeline for SARS-CoV-2 that could massively increase the laboratory efficiency, while being sustainable in terms of time and costs, should be based on a pooling strategy. In the past few months, researchers from different disciplines had this same idea: test groups, not individuals. This critical review intends to highlight both the general consents-even if the results from different publications have been obtained with different protocols-and the points of disagreement that are creating some interpretative/comprehension difficulties. Different pooling schemes and technical aspects associated to the type of pooling adopted are described and discussed. We hope that this review can consolidate information to support researchers in designing optimized COVID-19 testing protocols based on pooling.
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.