ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2021
Real-Life Head-to-Head Comparison of Performance of Two High-Throughput Automated Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Nasopharyngeal Swabs: The Alinity m and cobas 6800 SARS-CoV-2 Assays.
Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Simplifying SARS-CoV-2 wastewater-based surveillance using an automated FDA EUA assay.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Efficient SARS-CoV-2 variant detection and monitoring with Spike Screen next-generation sequencing.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the fully automated, sample-to-result Seegene STARlet-AIOS platform for detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza virus A, influenza virus B, and RSV.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Optimization of extraction-free protocols for SARS-CoV-2 detection using a commercial rRT-PCR assay.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Clinical comparison of three SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests for routine diagnostic testing.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Advances in molecular infectious diseases testing in the time of COVID-19.Clinical biochemistry · 2023Review
- SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and Clinical Presentation of COVID-19 in Patients Hospitalized during the Delta- and Omicron-Predominant Periods.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Contribution of PEPFAR-Supported HIV and TB Molecular Diagnostic Networks to COVID-19 Testing Preparedness in 16 Countries.Emerging infectious diseases · 2022Review
- Comparison and Harmonization of Different Semi-Automated and Automated qRT-PCR Assays in the Assessment of SARS-CoV-2.Viruses · 2022Article
- Performance of nasopharyngeal swab and saliva in detecting Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- An Overview of SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Diagnostics in Europe.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Strategies for Scaling up SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Testing Capacity.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Six SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Approaches Shows Substantial Genomic Variant-Dependent Intra- and Inter-Test Variability, Poor Interchangeability of Cycle Threshold and Complementary Turn-Around Times.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Primary Vaccination in a Cohort of Patients Hospitalized for Acute COVID-19 during Delta Variant Predominance.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Alinity m (Abbott Molecular, Des Plaines, IL) automated molecular analyzer allows continuous loading of samples and sample-to-result molecular detection of several microorganisms. The detection of SARS-CoV-2 by the Alinity m was compared with that of the cobas 6800 (Roche Molecular Systems, Branchburg, NJ; standard comparator) in a manufacturer-independent clinical evaluation on 2157 consecutive nasopharyngeal swab samples. Valid initial results on Alinity m and cobas 6800 were obtained from 2129 (98.7%) and 2157 (100%) samples, respectively. The overall percent agreement (95% CI) was 98.3% (2092/2129 [97.6%-98.7%]); positive percent agreement, 100% (961/961 [99.6%-100%]); negative percent agreement, 96.8% (1131/1168 [95.7%-97.7%]); and high κ value, 0.965 (0.954-0.976). There were 37 discordant results on Alinity m and, based on discordant analyses, including previous and/or follow-up PCR results, 22 could be considered analytically true positive with high probability. Due to a lack of additional information and an inability to perform repeated/further testing, the status of the remaining 15 discordant results remained unresolved. The throughput of the two analyzers was compared using testing on 564 samples in parallel across two 8-hour shifts in clinical practice. The turnaround times were compared using processing of 94 routine samples in parallel on each working day for 5 consecutive days. The two analyzers showed similar performance, with certain differences that have potential importance in some laboratory settings.
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.