ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2021
Sample pooling is efficient in PCR testing of SARS-CoV-2: a study in 7400 healthcare professionals.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low Rate of Asymptomatic Dengue Infection Detected in Coastal Kenya Using Pooled Polymerase Chain Reaction Testing.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024Article
- Statistical modeling and evaluation of the impact of multiplicity classification thresholds on the COVID-19 pool testing accuracy.PloS one · 2023Article
- An improvement of current hypercube pooling PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
SARS-CoV-2 pandemic shows the importance of having efficient virus diagnosis, especially in groups of particular relevance such as health care professionals, without involving a large economic expense. This is a prevalence study carried out in 7400 health care professionals in a 1350-bed hospital in Madrid, Spain. Pools of 10 samples were performed, using the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test for the diagnosis from clinical samples of nasopharyngeal exudate. A previous study was performed to evaluate the effect of the dilution in terms of sensitivity. The estimated sensitivity was over 95%. A total of 740 pools were performed, with a final result of 218 health care professionals being positive. Using the pooling system, the reagent cost reduction to the institution was 75.3%. It can be concluded that the described sample pooling system is a useful and efficient tool in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in certain groups, assuming a cost reduction without reducing the sensitivity.
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.