ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2021
The reliability of saliva for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients: Insights on the diagnostic performance and utility for COVID-19 screening.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR from self-collected saliva versus nasopharyngeal sampling: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Saudi medical journal · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluation of an immunochromatography-based rapid antigen test, Inspecter Kowa® SARS-CoV-2, using saliva specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy · 2023Article
- A 30-day follow-up study on the prevalence of SARS-COV-2 genetic markers in wastewater from the residence of COVID-19 patient and comparison with clinical positivity.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Comparing SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Human Saliva to Oropharyngeal Swabs, Nasopharyngeal Swabs, and Sputum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2023Review
- Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A scoping review.Oral diseases · 2022Article
- The Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spatial Care Path: Home, Community, and Emergency Diagnostic Portals.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies among HealthCare Workers in University Hospital in Krakow before the Era of Vaccination.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Investigation of discordant SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results using minimally processed saliva.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Importance of Adequate qPCR Controls in Infection Control.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current literature has focused on testing saliva in symptomatic patients, and little information is available regarding saliva performance in asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We compared paired saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) collected from 33 symptomatic and 12 asymptomatic known SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Saliva had an overall sensitivity of 59%, a specificity of 95%, and a negative predictive value of 98%. Saliva demonstrated higher sensitivity in symptomatic (80%) vs. asymptomatic individuals (36%) (P = 0.006), and in high-risk (symptomatic, febrile and/or with comorbidities) (82%) vs. low-risk (asymptomatic, afebrile, and no comorbidities) (22%) patients (P = 0.0002). Cycle threshold (Ct) values in NPS specimens were higher in saliva-negative vs. saliva-positive cases (P = 0.02 and <0.001). Overall, these findings show that despite saliva's low sensitivity in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, it can detect infections with lower Ct values and a potentially higher chance of viral transmission. Additional studies are warranted to fully evaluate saliva as a screening test for coronavirus disease-2019.
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.