ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
A Rapid Antigen Detection Test to Diagnose SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Exhaled Breath Condensate by A Modified Inflammacheck
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of breath analysis in detection of COVID-19 through Volatile organic compounds.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2024Pooled it
- Rapid Direct Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Aerosols in Exhaled Breath at the Point of Care.ACS sensors · 2023Article
- Potential Use of Exhaled Breath Condensate for Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Aluminium Gauze Reduces SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Non-Woven Masks Worn by Patients with COVID-19.Infectious disease reports · 2022Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection by exhaled breath spectral analysis: Introducing a ready-to-use point-of-care mass screening method.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Early Warning Systems for COVID-19 Infections Based on Low-Cost Indoor Air-Quality Sensors and LPWANs.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe standard test that identifies the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal (NP) swab specimens. We compared the accuracy of a rapid antigen detection test using exhaled breath condensate by a modified Inflammacheck
methodsWe performed a manufacturer-independent, cross-sectional, diagnostic accuracy study involving two Italian hospitals. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of Inflammacheck
resultsA total of 105 individuals (41 females, 39.0%; 64 males, 61.0%; mean age: 58.4 years) were included in the final analysis, with the RT-PCR being positive in 13 (12.4%) and negative in 92 (87.6%). The agreement between the two methods was 98.1%, with a Cohen's κ score of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.79-1.00). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Inflammacheck
conclusionsThe modified Inflammacheck
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.