ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2021
Testing individual and pooled saliva samples for sars-cov-2 nucleic acid: a prospective study.
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 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Molecular Diagnostic Testing (December 2023).Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Guideline
- Update of Guidelines for Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Korea.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2022Guideline
- Oral mouthwashes for asymptomatic to mildly symptomatic adults with COVID-19 and salivary viral load: a randomized, placebo-controlled, open-label clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Comparison between Nasopharyngeal and Saliva Samples for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses in Children with Acute Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: A Pilot Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Omicron Wave SARS-CoV-2 Diagnosis: Evaluation of Saliva, Anterior Nasal, and Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A scoping review.Oral diseases · 2022Article
- Article
- Impact of Thermal Pretreatment of Saliva on the RT-PCR Detection of SARS-CoV-2.Advances in virology · 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
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Control of the rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus requires efficient testing. We collected paired nasopharyngeal swab (NPs) and saliva samples from 303 subjects (52.8% symptomatic) at a drive-through testing center; 18% of whom tested positive. The NPs, salivas and five saliva pools were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA using the Aptima™ assay and a laboratory-developed test (LDT) on the Panther-Fusion™ Hologic® platform. The saliva sensitivity was 80% (LDT) and 87.5% (Aptima™) whereas that of NPs was 96.4% in both assays. The pooled saliva sensitivity of 72.7% (LDT) and 75% (Aptima™) was not significantly different of that of individual saliva testing. Saliva specimens appear to be suitable for sensitive non-invasive assays to detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid; pooling them for a single test will improve laboratory throughput.
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.