ArticlePeerJ2021
Evaluation of two fluorescence immunoassays for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-new tool to detect infective COVID-19 patients.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical accuracy of instrument-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen diagnostic tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Virology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Association Between Rapid Antigen Detection Tests and Real-Time Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.International journal of public health · 2023Pooled it
- Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Accuracy of rapid point-of-care antigen-based diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression analyzing influencing factors.PLoS medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative evaluation of RT-PCR and antigen-based rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) for SARS-CoV-2 detection: performance, variant specificity, and clinical implications.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Rapid assays of SARS-CoV-2 virus and noble biosensors by nanomaterials.Nano convergence · 2024Review
- COVID-19 self-testing: Countries accelerating policies ahead of WHO guidelines during pandemics, a global consultation.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Review
- Clinical Evaluation of Two Rapid Antigen Tests for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Detection.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Performance of Antigen Detection Tests for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Diagnostic Performance of Six Rapid Antigen Tests for SARS-CoV-2.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Performance of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical Accuracy of Instrument-Read SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Tests (Ag-IRRDTs).International journal of microbiology · 2022Article
- SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in the healthcare sector: A clinical prediction model for identifying false negative results.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2021Article
- SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen detection tests.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Hitting the diagnostic sweet spot: Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 salivary antigen testing with an off-the-shelf glucometer.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2021Article
- Potential of artificial intelligence to accelerate diagnosis and drug discovery for COVID-19.PeerJ · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReal-Time Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) is currently the only recommended diagnostic method for SARS-CoV-2. However, rapid immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 antigen could significantly reduce the COVID-19 burden currently weighing on laboratories around the world.
methodsWe evaluated the performance of two rapid fluorescence immunoassays (FIAs), SOFIA SARS Antigen FIA (Quidel Corporation, San Diego, CA, USA) and STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA (SD Biosensor Inc., Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea), which use an automated reader. The study used 64 RT-PCR characterized clinical samples (32 positive; 32 negative), which consisted of nasopharyngeal swabs in universal transport medium.
resultsOf the 32 positive specimens, all from patients within 5 days of symptom onset, the Quidel and SD Biosensor assays detected 30 (93.8%) and 29 (90.6%) samples, respectively. Among the 27 samples with high viral loads (Ct ≤ 25), the two tests had a sensitivity of 100%. Specificity was 96.9% for both kits.
conclusionThe high performance of the evaluated FIAs indicates a potential use as rapid and PCR-independent tools for COVID-19 diagnosis in early stages of infection. The excellent sensitivity to detect cases with viral loads above ~10
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.