ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Buccal swabs as non-invasive specimens for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein by aptamer conformation change based on a reusable aptasensor.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 S protein based on FRET between carbon quantum dots and gold nanoparticles.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Diagnostic performance of patient self-collected oral swab (tongue and cheek) in comparison with healthcare worker-collected nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 detection.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A scoping review.Oral diseases · 2022Article
- Clinical Performance of Self-Collected Nasal Swabs and Antigen Rapid Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Resource-Poor Settings.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Evaluation of RT-qPCR of mouthwash and buccal swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in children and adults.American journal of infection control · 2022Article
- aMMP-8 Oral Fluid PoC Test in Relation to Oral and Systemic Diseases.Frontiers in oral health · 2022Review
- Evaluation of IL-1β and CRP mRNA expression levels by RT-PCR in postorthodontic treatment patients with temporomandibular joint disorders: a cross-sectional Study.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe current gold standard for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA involves subjecting nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs to reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). However, both sample types need to be collected by trained professionals. Using self-collected buccal swabs as an alternative could simplify and accelerate diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
objectiveTo assess self-collected buccal swab samples as an alternative method for SARS-CoV-2 detection in patients with COVID-19.
methodsBuccal swab samples were self-collected by 73 patients with COVID-19. Total RNA was extracted using Qiagen kits. RNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 Env protein and human RNase P as an internal control was amplified using the TRUPCR
resultThe sensitivity of RT-qPCR from buccal swabs was 58.9% (43/73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 46.77%-70.27%) and that of RT-qPCR from saliva was 62.90% (39/62; 95% CI 49.69%-74.84%) taking positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR from nasopharyngeal swabs as the gold standard.
conclusionSelf-collected buccal swabs are promising alternatives to nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swabs for SARS CoV-2 detection.
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.