SynthesisScientific reports2021
Detection of three pandemic causing coronaviruses from non-respiratory samples: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Viral shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in body fluids associated with sexual activity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Frequency, dynamics, and duration of faecal shedding in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, a scoping review.Epidemiology and infection · 2026Article
- Predicting pathogen evolution and immune evasion in the age of artificial intelligence.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Impact of DHCWs' Safety Perception on Vaccine Acceptance and Adoption of Risk Mitigation Strategies.JDR clinical and translational research · 2023Article
- Advances in laboratory detection methods and technology application of SARS-CoV-2.Journal of medical virology · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
SARS-CoV-2 has posed an unprecedented challenge to the world. Pandemics have been caused previously by viruses of this family like Middle East Respiratory Corona Virus (MERS CoV), Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus (SARS CoV). Although these viruses are primarily respiratory viruses, but they have been isolated from non-respiratory samples as well. Presently, the detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from different clinical specimens using Real Time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerized Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) after onset of symptoms is not yet well established. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to establish the profile of detecting SARS-CoV-2, MERS CoV, SARS CoV from different types of clinical specimens other than the respiratory using a standard diagnostic test (qRT-PCR). A total of 3429 non-respiratory specimens were recorded: SARS CoV (total sample-802), MERS CoV (total sample-155), SARS CoV-2 (total sample-2347). Out of all the samples studied high positive rate was seen for saliva with 96.7% (14/14; 95% CI 87.6-100.0%) for SARS CoV and 57.5% (58/250; 95% CI - 1.2 to 116.2%) for SARS CoV-2, while low detection rate in urine samples for SARS CoV-2 with 2.2% (8/318; 95% CI 0.6-3.7%) and 9.6% (12/61; 95% CI - 0.9 to 20.1%) for SARS CoV but there was relatively higher positivity in urine samples for MERS CoV with detection rate of 32.4% (2/38; 95% CI - 37.3 to 102.1%). In Stool sample positivity was 54.9% (396/779; 95% CI 41.0-68.8%), 45.2% (180/430; 95% CI 28.1-62.3%) and 34.7% (4/38; 95% CI - 29.5 to 98.9%) for SARS CoV-2, MERS CoV, and SARS CoV, respectively. In blood sample the positivity was 33.3% (7/21; 95% CI 13.2-53.5%), 23.7% (42/277; 95% CI 10.5-36.9%) and 2.5% (2/81; 95% CI 0.00-5.8%) for MERS CoV, SARS CoV-2 and SARS CoV respectively. SARS-CoV-2 along with previous two pandemic causing viruses from this family, were highly detected stool and saliva. A low positive rate was recorded in blood samples. Viruses were also detected in fluids along with unusual samples like semen and vaginal secretions thus highlighting unique pathogenic potential of SARS-CoV-2.
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.