Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34458708›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2021

Pooled RT-qPCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in schools - a cluster randomised trial.

Alexander Joachim, Felix Dewald, Isabelle Suárez, Michael Zemlin, Isabelle Lang, Regine Stutz, Anna Marthaler, Hans Martin Bosse, Nadine Lübke, Juliane Münch and 19 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies: A scoping review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Alexander JoachimDepartment of Pediatrics, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Felix DewaldInstitute of Virology, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Isabelle SuárezDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Michael ZemlinDepartment of General Pediatrics and Neonatology, Saarland University Homburg, Homburg, Germany.
Isabelle LangDepartment of General Pediatrics and Neonatology, Saarland University Homburg, Homburg, Germany.
Regine StutzDepartment of General Pediatrics and Neonatology, Saarland University Homburg, Homburg, Germany.
Anna MarthalerInstitute of Virology, Saarland University Homburg, Homburg, Germany.
Hans Martin BosseDepartment of General Pediatrics, Neonatology and Pediatric Cardiology, University Children´s Hospital, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany.
Nadine LübkeInstitute of Virology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany.
Juliane MünchDepartment of General Pediatrics, Neonatology and Pediatric Cardiology, University Children´s Hospital, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany.
Marie-Annett BernardInstitute of Virology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany.
Kathrin JeltschDepartment of Pediatrics I, University Children's Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Burkhard TönshoffDepartment of Pediatrics I, University Children's Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Niklas WeidnerDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Virology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hans-Georg KräusslichDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Virology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Lena BirzeleDivision of Pediatric Infectious Disease, Dr. v. Hauner Children's Hospital, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Johannes HübnerDivision of Pediatric Infectious Disease, Dr. v. Hauner Children's Hospital, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Patricia SchmiedDivision of Pediatric Infectious Disease, Dr. v. Hauner Children's Hospital, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Melanie Meyer-BühnDivision of Pediatric Infectious Disease, Dr. v. Hauner Children's Hospital, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Gibran Horemheb-RubioInstitute of Virology, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Oliver A CornelyDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Heinz HaverkampInstitute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Gerhard WiesmüllerPublic Health Department Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Gerd FätkenheuerDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Barbara HeroDepartment of Pediatrics, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Rolf KaiserInstitute of Virology, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Jörg DötschDepartment of Pediatrics, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Jan RybnikerDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
B-FAST study group
University of Cologne · DEDüsseldorf University Hospital · DESaarland University · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEHeidelberg University · DECBS International Business School · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe extent to which children and adolescents contribute to SARS-CoV-2 transmission remains not fully understood. Novel high-capacity testing methods may provide real-time epidemiological data in educational settings helping to establish a rational approach to prevent and minimize SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We investigated whether pooling of samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection by RT-qPCR is a sensitive and feasible high-capacity diagnostic strategy for surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 infections in schools.

methodsIn this study, students and school staff of 14 educational facilities in Germany were tested sequentially between November 9 and December 23, 2020, two or three times per week for at least three consecutive weeks. Participants were randomized for evaluation of two different age adjusted swab sampling methods (oropharyngeal swabs or buccal swabs compared to saliva swabs using a 'lolli method'). Swabs were collected and pooled for SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR. Individuals of positive pooled tests were retested by RT-qPCR the same or the following day. Positive individuals were quarantined while the SARS-CoV-2 negative individuals remained in class with continued pooled RT-qPCR surveillance. The study is registered with the German Clinical Trials register (registration number: DRKS00023911).

findings5,537 individuals were eligible and 3970 participants were enroled and included in the analysis. In students, a total of 21,978 swabs were taken and combined in 2218 pooled RT-qPCR tests. We detected 41 positive pooled tests (1·8%) leading to 36 SARS-CoV-2 cases among students which could be identified by individual re-testing. The cumulative 3-week incidence for primary schools was 564/100,000 (6/1064, additionally 1 infection detected in week 4) and 1249/100,000 (29/2322) for secondary schools. In secondary schools, there was no difference in the number of SARS-CoV-2 positive students identified from pooled oropharyngeal swabs compared to those identified from pooled saliva samples (lolli method) (14 vs. 15 cases; 1·3% vs. 1·3%; OR 1.1; 95%-CI 0·5-2·5). A single secondary school accounted for 17 of 36 cases (47%) indicating a high burden of asymptomatic prevalent SARS-CoV-2 cases in the respective school and community.

interpretationIn educational settings, SARS-CoV-2 screening by RT-qPCR-based pooled testing with easily obtainable saliva samples is a feasible method to detect incident cases and observe transmission dynamics.

fundingFederal Ministry of education and research (BMBF; Project B-FAST in "NaFoUniMedCovid19"; registration number: 01KX2021).

Indexed as

Covid-19Pooled testingRT-qPCRSARS-CoV-2SchoolSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID34458708
PMCPMC8384501
OpenAlexW3193542769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.