ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021
Comparison of analytical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection kits.
Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicenter evaluation of Coyote FlashDetect LyocartE multiplex assays for six respiratory pathogens: a comparative analysis with Sansure and Cepheid assays.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Concordance of Two- and Three-Gene SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Assays in Cameroon: Implications for Efficient Pandemic Response in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2026Article
- Enhanced testing can substantially improve defense against several types of respiratory virus pandemic.Epidemics · 2025Article
- Nanoisland SERS-Substrates for Specific Detection and Quantification of Influenza A Virus.Biosensors · 2023Article
- M gene targeted qRT-PCR approach for SARS-CoV-2 virus detection.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A fully integrated duplex RT-LAMP device for the detection of viral infections.Biomedical microdevices · 2023Article
- Article
- Multiplex Lithographic SERS Aptasensor for Detection of Several Respiratory Viruses in One Pot.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Lithographic SERS Aptasensor for Ultrasensitive Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Biological Fluids.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Aptamer-coated track-etched membranes with a nanostructured silver layer for single virus detection in biological fluids.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- A Combination of Membrane Filtration and Raman-Active DNA Ligand Greatly Enhances Sensitivity of SERS-Based Aptasensors for Influenza A Virus.Frontiers in chemistry · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has had a significant impact on global public health systems, making nucleic acid detection an important tool in epidemic prevention and control. Detection kits based on real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (rRT-PCR) have been used widely in clinics, but their analytical sensitivity (limit of detection, LOD) remains controversial. Moreover, there is limited research evaluating the analytical sensitivity of other molecular detection kits.
methodsIn this study, armored ribonucleic acid reference materials developed in-house were used to evaluate the analytical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection kits approved by the National Medical Products Administration. These were based on rRT-PCR and other molecular detection assays.
resultsThe percentage retesting required with rRT-PCR kits was as follows: 0%, 7.69%, 15.38%, and 23.08% for samples with concentrations ranging from 50 000 to 781 copies/ml. In total, 93% of rRT-PCR kits had a LOD <1000 copies/ml. Only one kit had an LOD >1000 copies/ml. The LOD of other molecular detection kits ranged from 68 to 2264 copies/ml.
conclusionsThe study findings can help pharmaceutical companies optimize and improve detection kits, guide laboratories in selecting kits, and assist medical workers in their daily work.
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.