Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34017594›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science : water research & technology2021

Reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in raw wastewater: findings from an interlaboratory methods evaluation in the U.S.

Brian M Pecson, Emily Darby, Charles N Haas, Yamrot M Amha, Mitchel Bartolo, Richard Danielson, Yeggie Dearborn, George Di Giovanni, Christobel Ferguson, Stephanie Fevig and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science : water research & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 139 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
139citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

139 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

79 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

18 authors.

Brian M Pecson *Trussell Technologies Inc., Oakland, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6100-4732
Emily Darby *Trussell Technologies Inc., Oakland, California, USA.
Charles N HaasDrexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9255-9930
Yamrot M AmhaTrussell Technologies Inc., Pasadena, California, USA.
Mitchel BartoloTrussell Technologies Inc., Solana Beach, California, USA.
Richard DanielsonCel Analytical Inc., San Francisco, California, USA.
Yeggie DearbornCel Analytical Inc., San Francisco, California, USA.
George Di GiovanniMetropolitan Water District of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Christobel FergusonThe Water Research Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.
Stephanie FevigThe Water Research Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2732-2010
Erica GaddisUtah Department of Environmental Quality, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Donald GrayEast Bay Municipal Utility District, Oakland, California, USA.
George LukasikBCS Laboratories Inc., Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Bonnie MullBCS Laboratories Inc., Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Liana OlivasTrussell Technologies Inc., Pasadena, California, USA.
Adam OlivieriEOA Inc., Oakland, California, USA.
Yan QuTrussell Technologies Inc., Pasadena, California, USA.
SARS-CoV-2 Interlaboratory Consortium

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In response to COVID-19, the international water community rapidly developed methods to quantify the SARS-CoV-2 genetic signal in untreated wastewater. Wastewater surveillance using such methods has the potential to complement clinical testing in assessing community health. This interlaboratory assessment evaluated the reproducibility and sensitivity of 36 standard operating procedures (SOPs), divided into eight method groups based on sample concentration approach and whether solids were removed. Two raw wastewater samples were collected in August 2020, amended with a matrix spike (betacoronavirus OC43), and distributed to 32 laboratories across the U.S. Replicate samples analyzed in accordance with the project's quality assurance plan showed high reproducibility across the 36 SOPs: 80% of the recovery-corrected results fell within a band of ±1.15 log

Identifiers

PMID34017594
PMCPMC8129921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.