Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33899053›Full record

ReviewThe Analyst2021

Current state of commercial point-of-care nucleic acid tests for infectious diseases.

Jane Y Zhang, Andrew T Bender, David S Boyle, Paul K Drain, Jonathan D Posner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Analyst, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Bacteria as living biosensors for DNA.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

5 authors.

Jane Y ZhangDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington, USA. jposner@uw.edu.
Andrew T Bender
David S Boyle
Paul K Drain
Jonathan D Posner

Funding

Electrokinetic paper diagnostic platform: 15-minute, quantitative nucleic acidamplification for viral pathogens in whole bloodR01EB022630 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI POSNER, JONATHAN D · 2017 to 2020
$2.2M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB022630
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has put the spotlight on the urgent need for integrated nucleic acid tests (NATs) for infectious diseases, especially those that can be used near patient ("point-of-care", POC), with rapid results and low cost, but without sacrificing sensitivity or specificity of gold standard PCR tests. In the US, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments Certificate of Waiver (CLIA-waiver) is mandated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and designated to any laboratory testing with high simplicity and low risk for error, suitable for application in the POC. Since the first issuance of CLIA-waiver to Abbot's ID NOW Influenza A&B in 2015, many more NAT systems have been developed, received the CLIA-waiver in the US or World Health Organization (WHO)'s pre-qualification, and deployed to the front line of infectious disease detection. This review highlights the regulatory process for FDA and WHO in evaluating these NATs and the technology innovation of existing CLIA-waived systems. Understanding the technical advancement and challenges, unmet needs, and the trends of commercialization facilitated through the regulatory processes will help pave the foundation for future development and technology transfer from research to the market place.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesCOVID-19Nucleic AcidsHumansPandemicsPoint-of-Care SystemsPoint-of-Care TestingSARS-CoV-2Nucleic Acids

Identifiers

PMID33899053
PMCPMC8139840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.