ArticleScientific reports2021
Pooled testing with replication as a mass testing strategy for the COVID-19 pandemics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing clinical utility of STANDARD M10 rapid rtRT-PCR assay with pooled testing for SARS-CoV-2 screening.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Optimization of Screening Strategies for COVID-19: Scoping Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Interactions between carbon nanotubes and external structures of SARS-CoV-2 using molecular docking and molecular dynamics.Journal of molecular structure · 2023Article
- Evaluation of sample pooling for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a resource-limited setting, Dominican Republic.Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.) · 2023Article
- Article
- Discourse on COVID-19 Mass Testing vs. Rapid Testing Processing.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Optimizing and evaluating PCR-based pooled screening during COVID-19 pandemics.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Nested pool testing strategy for the diagnosis of infectious diseases.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- COVID-19 Outbreak in a Military Unit in Korea.Epidemiology and health · 2021Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 through pool testing for COVID-19: an integrative review.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2021Review
- Considerations for Pooled Testing of Employees for SARS-CoV-2.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2021Article
- Large-scale frequent testing and tracing to supplement control of Covid-19 and vaccination rollout constrained by supply.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2021Article
- Mass Testing and Proactiveness Affect Epidemic Spreading.Journal of the Indian Institute of Science · 2021Review
- Improved GNSS Localization and Byzantine Detection in UAV Swarms.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic it is essential to test as many people as possible, in order to detect early outbreaks of the infection. Present testing solutions are based on the extraction of RNA from patients using oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swabs, and then testing with real-time PCR for the presence of specific RNA filaments identifying the virus. This approach is limited by the availability of reactants, trained technicians and laboratories. One of the ways to speed up the testing procedures is a group testing, where the swabs of multiple patients are grouped together and tested. In this paper we propose to use the group testing technique in conjunction with an advanced replication scheme in which each patient is allocated in two or more groups to reduce the total numbers of tests and to allow testing of even larger numbers of people. Under mild assumptions, a 13 × average reduction of tests can be achieved compared to individual testing without delay in time.
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.