Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33770388›Full record

ArticleInfection2021

Correctly performed nasal swabs.

Konstantin Zedtwitz-Liebenstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author.

Konstantin Zedtwitz-LiebensteinHead Office of Vienna Hospital Association, Thomas Klestil Platz 7, 1030, Vienna, Austria. konstantin.zedtwitz-liebenstein@gesundheitsverbund.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3227-3236

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the incidence of new cases of coronavirus disease increased exponentially, the use of viral swabs to collect nasopharyngeal specimens are increasing drastically. Therefore, healthcare workers military staff and uneducated nonprofessional's were ordered to make this swabs. Subsequently case reports reported about basal skull perforation, cerebrospinal fluid fistula and injury due to an incorrect technique.

methodsSearch of the literature.

resultsOnly in 44% of the videos (Youtube) nasal swabs were correctly performed. Due to an false technique biological sampling resulted in false-negative COVID-19 tests.

conclusionAlthough professional societies started to report about this unacceptable situation, no publication reported about this health endangerment. In this time of overwhelming information and diversity of opinions, it is necessary to report about this in the hope, all media and TV reports will follow this article to show correctly performed nasal swabs to reduce false-negative COVID-19 tests and injury.

Indexed as

COVID-19False Negative ReactionsHumansNasal CavityNasopharynxSARS-CoV-2Specimen HandlingEndangermentFalse-negative testInjuryNasal swab

Identifiers

PMID33770388
PMCPMC7994961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.