ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2021
Saliva is Comparable to Nasopharyngeal Swabs for Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- A qualitative descriptive study exploring perspectives on a school-based take-home COVID-19 saliva testing program.Paediatrics & child health · 2026Article
- Contrasting effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination vs. infection on antibody and TCR repertoires.PloS one · 2026Article
- Contrasting Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination vs. Infection on Antibody and TCR Repertoires.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Testing for SARS-CoV-2: lessons learned and current use cases.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP in saliva: enhancing the results via a combination of cooling and specimen dilution procedure.Virusdisease · 2024Article
- Evaluation of wastewater surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in a prison population: a mixed-methods approach.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- A one-step low-cost molecular test for SARS-CoV-2 detection suitable for community testing using minimally processed saliva.Biology methods & protocols · 2024Article
- Saliva diagnostics: Salivaomics, saliva exosomics, and saliva liquid biopsy.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2023Review
- Advancements in SARS-CoV-2 Testing: Enhancing Accessibility through Machine Learning-Enhanced Biosensors.Micromachines · 2023Review
- Salivary SARS-CoV-2 RNA for diagnosis of COVID-19 patients: a systematic revisew and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.The Japanese dental science review · 2023Review
- Diagnostic Performance and Tolerability of Saliva and Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens in the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Similar Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Oropharyngeal/Nasopharyngeal and Saliva Samples on the Hologic Panther Platform.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- A novel strategy to avoid sensitivity loss in pooled testing for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance: validation using nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Kappa Values in Testing the Concordance: Comments on a Recent Article about Nasopharyngeal Swabs for SARS-CoV-2 Detection.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Validation of RT-qPCR test for SARS-CoV-2 in saliva specimens.Journal of infection and public health · 2022Article
- Saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A scoping review.Oral diseases · 2022Article
- Performance of nasopharyngeal swab and saliva in detecting Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The continued need for molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the potential for self-collected saliva as an alternative to nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs for sample acquisition led us to compare saliva to NP swabs in an outpatient setting without restrictions to avoid food, drink, smoking, or tooth-brushing. A total of 385 pairs of NP and saliva specimens were obtained, the majority from individuals presenting for initial evaluation, and were tested on two high-sensitivity reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) platforms, the Abbott m2000 and Abbott Alinity m (both with limits of detection [LoD] of 100 copies of viral RNA/ml). Concordance between saliva and NP swabs was excellent overall (Cohen's κ = 0.93) for both initial and follow-up testing, for both platforms, and for specimens treated with guanidinium transport medium as preservative as well as for untreated saliva (κ = 0.88 to 0.95). Viral loads were on average 16× higher in NP specimens than saliva specimens, suggesting that only the relatively small fraction of outpatients (∼8% in this study) who present with very low viral loads (<1,600 copies/ml from NP swabs) would be missed by testing saliva instead of NP swabs when using sensitive testing platforms. Special attention was necessary to ensure leak-resistant specimen collection and transport. The advantages of self-collection of saliva, without behavioral restrictions, will likely outweigh a minor potential decrease in clinical sensitivity in individuals less likely to pose an infectious risk to others for many real-world scenarios, especially for initial testing.
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.