Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33706863›Full record

ReviewEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2021

Towards a sensitive and accurate interpretation of molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2: a rapid review of 264 studies.

Kamelia R Stanoeva, Annemiek A van der Eijk, Adam Meijer, Laetitia M Kortbeek, Marion P G Koopmans, Chantal B E M Reusken

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kamelia R StanoevaCenter for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Annemiek A van der EijkDepartment of Viroscience, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Adam MeijerCenter for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Laetitia M KortbeekCenter for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Marion P G KoopmansDepartment of Viroscience, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Chantal B E M ReuskenCenter for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundSensitive molecular diagnostics and correct test interpretation are crucial for accurate COVID-19 diagnosis and thereby essential for good clinical practice. Furthermore, they are a key factor in outbreak control where active case finding in combination with isolation and contact tracing are crucial.AimWith the objective to inform the public health and laboratory responses to the pandemic, we reviewed current published knowledge on the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 infection as assessed by RNA molecular detection in a wide range of clinical samples.MethodsWe performed an extensive search on studies published between 1 December 2019 and 15 May 2020, reporting on molecular detection and/or isolation of SARS-CoV-2 in any human laboratory specimen.ResultsWe compiled a dataset of 264 studies including 32,515 COVID-19 cases, and additionally aggregated data points (n = 2,777) from sampling of 217 adults with known infection timeline. We summarised data on SARS-CoV-2 detection in the respiratory and gastrointestinal tract, blood, oral fluid, tears, cerebrospinal fluid, peritoneal fluid, semen, vaginal fluid; where provided, we also summarised specific observations on SARS-CoV-2 detection in pregnancy, infancy, children, adolescents and immunocompromised individuals.ConclusionOptimal SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing relies on choosing the most appropriate sample type, collected with adequate sampling technique, and with the infection timeline in mind. We outlined knowledge gaps and directions for future well-documented systematic studies.

Indexed as

COVID-19 TestingMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesCOVID-19HumansSensitivity and SpecificityCOVID-19Laboratory DiagnosisPolymerase Chain ReactionSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33706863
PMCPMC7953531
OpenAlexW3134806776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.