ArticleJournal of medical virology2021
Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS-COV-2 virus.
Article in Journal of medical virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preparation of FeMikrochimica acta · 2025Article
- A Colorimetric RT-LAMP Assay for Rapid Detection ofACS omega · 2024Article
- [Implementation of isotermic PCR for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024Article
- SARS-CoV-2 Testing of Emergency Department Patients Using cobasDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Diagnostics and analysis of SARS-CoV-2: current status, recent advances, challenges and perspectives.Chemical science · 2023Review
- Article
- Performance comparison of two nucleic acid amplification systems for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A multi-center study.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Article
- The U.S. Travel Health Pharmacists' Role in a Post-COVID-19 Pandemic Era.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- FDA authorized molecular point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 tests: A critical review on principles, systems and clinical performances.Biosensors & bioelectronics: X · 2022Review
- Evaluation of Four Fully Integrated Molecular Assays for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses during the Co-Circulation of SARS-CoV-2, Influenza and RSV.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Abbott ID NOW SARS-CoV-2 rapid test for the triage of acute medical admissions.The Journal of hospital infection · 2022Article
- Lung donation and SARS-CoV-2 transmission: Missed detection versus missed opportunity?Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2022Article
- Multisite Clinical Validation of Isothermal Amplification-Based SARS-CoV-2 Detection Assays Using Different Sampling Strategies.Microbiology spectrum · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a new point-of-care quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain test for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2021Article
- Evaluation of six different rapid methods for nucleic acid detection of SARS-COV-2 virus.Journal of medical virology · 2021Article
- Multi-site clinical validation of Isothermal Amplification based SARS-COV-2 detection assays using different sampling strategies.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2021Article
- Rapid diagnostic methods for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) detection: an evidence-based report.Journal of medicine and lifeReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic there is a mass screening of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) happening around the world due to the extensive spread of the infections. There is a high demand for rapid diagnostic tests to expedite the identification of cases and to facilitate early isolation and control spread. Hence this study evaluates six different rapid nucleic acid detection assays that are commercially available for SARS-CoV-2 virus detection. Nasopharyngeal samples were collected from 4981 participants and were tested for the SARS-CoV-2 virus by the gold standard real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) method and with one of these six rapid methods of detection. Evaluation of the rapid nucleic acid detection assays was done by comparing the results of these rapid methods with the gold standard RT-qPCR results for SARS-COV-2 detection. AQ-TOP had the highest sensitivity (98%) and a strong kappa value of 0.943 followed by Genechecker and Abbot ID NOW. The POCKIT (ii RT-PCR) assay had the highest test accuracy of 99.29% followed by Genechecker and Cobas Liat. Atila iAMP showed the highest percentage of invalid reports (35.5%) followed by AQ-TOP with 6% and POCKIT with 3.7% of invalid reports. Genechecker system, Abbott ID NOW, and Cobas Liat were found to have the best performance and agreement when compared with the standard RT-PCR for COVID-19 detection. With further research, these rapid tests have the potential to be employed in large-scale screening of COVID-19.
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.