Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33862213›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021

Diagnostic accuracy of LAMP versus PCR over the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Masato Inaba, Yuki Higashimoto, Yoko Toyama, Tomoya Horiguchi, Masaya Hibino, Mitsunaga Iwata, Kazuyoshi Imaizumi, Yohei Doi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification for Diagnosis of Zoonotic Malaria.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Masato InabaDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan. Electronic address: imasato@fujita-hu.ac.jp.
Yuki HigashimotoFaculty of Medical Technology, Fujita Health University School of Health Sciences, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Yoko ToyamaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Tomoya HoriguchiDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Masaya HibinoDepartment of Emergency and General Internal Medicine, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Mitsunaga IwataDepartment of Emergency and General Internal Medicine, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Kazuyoshi ImaizumiDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Yohei DoiDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan; Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Fujita Health University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveReverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) has been validated to diagnose several viral infections. However, its diagnostic accuracy in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in real-life clinical settings remains unclear. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of RT-LAMP compared to reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) over the disease course of COVID-19.

methodsA total of 124 nasopharyngeal swab samples obtained from 24 COVID-19 patients were tested by RT-LAMP and RT-qPCR. Sensitivities and specificities of RT-LAMP compared with RT-qPCR were analyzed as a function of time from onset.

resultsUp to the 9th day after onset, the RT-LAMP had a positivity of 92.8%, and the sensitivity and specificity compared with RT-qPCR was 100%. However, after the 10th day after onset, the positivity of RT-LAMP decreased to less than 25%, and the concordance of positivity between the two methods was below 60%. The limit of detection of RT-LAMP was 6.7 copies/reaction.

conclusionsUntil the 9th day after the onset of symptoms, RT-LAMP had the same diagnostic accuracy as RT-qPCR. These findings suggest that RT-LAMP can be used as a diagnostic tool for COVID-19 as an alternative to RT-qPCR in the acute symptomatic phase of COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19 TestingSARS-CoV-2AdultCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesSensitivity and SpecificityCOVID-19RT-LAMPRT-qPCRSensitivitySpecificity

Identifiers

PMID33862213
PMCPMC8056478
OpenAlexW3154479642

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.