SynthesisAmerican journal of infection control2021
Are saliva and deep throat sputum as reliable as common respiratory specimens for SARS-CoV-2 detection? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in American journal of infection control, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical prediction models for diagnosis of COVID-19 among adult patients: a validation and agreement study.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Is saliva collected passively without forceful coughing sensitive to detect SARS-CoV-2 in ambulatory cases? A systematic review.Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2022Pooled it
- A comparative study of COVID-19 point-of-care detection across human biofluids using MEMS-based near-infrared spectroscopy and machine learning.Biomedical microdevices · 2026Article
- Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2 From Throat Swabs Performed With or Without Specimen Collection From the Tonsils: Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Saliva-based detection of SARS-CoV-2: a bibliometric analysis of global research.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2024Article
- Efficacy of respiratory rehabilitation in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Identification of SARS-CoV-2 biomarkers in saliva by transcriptomic and proteomics analysis.Clinical proteomics · 2023Article
- Recent advances in RNA sample preparation techniques for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva and gargle.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2023Review
- Salivary SARS-CoV-2 RNA for diagnosis of COVID-19 patients: a systematic revisew and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.The Japanese dental science review · 2023Review
- SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection by saliva; an alternative to nasopharyngeal specimen: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Nasopharyngeal Swab and Saliva Samples from Patients Infected with Omicron Variant.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- CeORSC advances · 2023Article
- Accurate Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by Next-Generation Sequencing in Low Viral Load Specimens.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Variant-specific SARS-CoV-2 shedding rates in wastewater.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Comparing SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Human Saliva to Oropharyngeal Swabs, Nasopharyngeal Swabs, and Sputum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2023Review
- Molecular Diagnosis of COVID-19; Biosafety and Pre-analytical Recommendations.Iranian journal of pathology · 2023Review
- SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR Ct values in saliva and nasopharyngeal swab samples for disease severity prediction.Journal of oral microbiology · 2023Article
- Control of an outbreak of COVID-19 at a tertiary hospital in Taiwan.Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi · 2022Article
- Temporal dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 genome and detection of variants of concern in wastewater influent from two metropolitan areas in Arkansas.The Science of the total environment · 2022Article
- SARS-CoV-2 detection methods: A comprehensive review.Saudi journal of biological sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic raises an urgent need for large-scale control through easier, cheaper, and safer diagnostic specimens, including saliva and sputum. We aimed to conduct a systemic review and meta-analysis on the reliability and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection in saliva and deep throat sputum (DTS) compared to nasopharyngeal, combined naso/oropharyngeal, and oropharyngeal swabs.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement. The inclusion criteria were studies that specifically assessed a sample of saliva or DTS with at least one other respiratory specimen in patients with COVID-19 infection, based on RT-PCR tests. The DerSimonian-Laird bivariate random-effects model analysis performed using STATA software with the "metaprop" package.
resultsFrom 1598 studies, we retrieved 33 records, of which 26 studies were included for quantitative analysis. We found an overall sensitivity of 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86-100) for bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, 92% (95% CI, 80-99) for double naso/oropharyngeal swabs, 87% (95% CI, 77-95) for nasopharyngeal swabs, 83% (95% CI, 77-89) for saliva, 82% (95% CI, 76-88) for DTS, and 44% (95% CI, 35-52) for oropharyngeal swabs among symptomatic patients, respectively. Regardless of the type of specimens, the viral load and sensitivity in the severe patients were higher than mild and in the symptomatic patients higher than asymptomatic cases.
conclusionsThe present review provides evidence for the diagnostic value of different respiratory specimens and supports saliva and DTS as promising diagnostic tools for first-line screening of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, the methods of sampling, storing, and laboratory assay need to be optimized and validated before introducing as a definitive diagnosis tool. Saliva, DTS, and nasopharyngeal swab showed approximately similar results, and sensitivity was directly related to the disease severity. This review revealed a relationship between viral load, disease severity, and test sensitivity. None of the specimens showed appropriate diagnostic sensitivity for asymptomatic patients.
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.