Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34464393›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Diagnostic performance and clinical implications of rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in Mexico using real-world nationwide COVID-19 registry data.

Omar Yaxmehen Bello-Chavolla, Neftali Eduardo Antonio-Villa, Luisa Fernández-Chirino, Enrique C Guerra, Carlos A Fermín-Martínez, Alejandro Márquez-Salinas, Arsenio Vargas-Vázquez, Jessica Paola Bahena-López

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Effectiveness of a nationwide COVID-19 vaccination program in Mexico against symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalizations, and death: a retrospective analysis of national surveillance data.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Observational
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

8 authors.

Omar Yaxmehen Bello-ChavollaDivisión de Investigación, Instituto Nacional de Geriatría, Mexico City, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-3093-937X
Neftali Eduardo Antonio-VillaMD/PhD (PECEM), Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Luisa Fernández-ChirinoFaculty of Chemistry, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Enrique C GuerraMD/PhD (PECEM), Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-0677-9935
Carlos A Fermín-MartínezMD/PhD (PECEM), Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Alejandro Márquez-SalinasMD/PhD (PECEM), Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Arsenio Vargas-VázquezMD/PhD (PECEM), Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.
Jessica Paola Bahena-LópezMD/PhD (PECEM), Faculty of Medicine, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSARS-CoV-2 testing capacity is important to monitor epidemic dynamics and as a mitigation strategy. Given difficulties of large-scale quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) implementation, rapid antigen tests (Rapid Ag-T) have been proposed as alternatives in settings like Mexico. Here, we evaluated diagnostic performance of Rapid Ag-T for SARS-CoV-2 infection and its associated clinical implications compared to qRT-PCR testing in Mexico.

methodsWe analyzed data from the COVID-19 registry of the Mexican General Directorate of Epidemiology up to April 30th, 2021 (n = 6,632,938) and cases with both qRT-PCR and Rapid Ag-T (n = 216,388). We evaluated diagnostic performance using accuracy measures and assessed time-dependent changes in the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUROC). We also explored test discordances as predictors of hospitalization, intubation, severe COVID-19 and mortality.

resultsRapid Ag-T is primarily used in Mexico City. Rapid Ag-T have low sensitivity 37.6% (95%CI 36.6-38.7), high specificity 95.5% (95%CI 95.1-95.8) and acceptable positive 86.1% (95%CI 85.0-86.6) and negative predictive values 67.2% (95%CI 66.2-69.2). Rapid Ag-T has optimal diagnostic performance up to days 3 after symptom onset, and its performance is modified by testing location, comorbidity, and age. qRT-PCR (-) / Rapid Ag-T (+) cases had higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes (HR 1.54 95% CI 1.41-1.68) and were older, qRT-PCR (+)/ Rapid Ag-T(-) cases had slightly higher risk or adverse outcomes and ≥7 days from symptom onset (HR 1.53 95% CI 1.48-1.59). Cases detected with rapid Ag-T were younger, without comorbidities, and milder COVID-19 course.

conclusionsRapid Ag-T could be used as an alternative to qRT-PCR for large scale SARS-CoV-2 testing in Mexico. Interpretation of Rapid Ag-T results should be done with caution to minimize the risk associated with false negative results.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Serological TestingAdultAntigens, ViralArea Under CurveCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMexicoMiddle AgedProportional Hazards ModelsRegistriesRetrospective StudiesRNA, ViralAntigens, ViralRNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID34464393
PMCPMC8407542

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.