Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34549577›Full record

Observational studyRevista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia2021

[Evaluation of the validity of Ag PANBIO-COVID19 in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic or mildly infected patients].

P Gras-Valenti, I Vidal, I Montiel-Higuero, I Escribano, N Algado-Selles, P Chico-Sánchez, M P Ventero, N Jiménez-Sepulveda, C Molina-Pardines, E Merino-Lucas and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 57% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

P Gras-Valenti
I Vidal
I Montiel-Higuero
I Escribano
N Algado-Selles
P Chico-Sánchez
M P VenteroMaria Paz Ventero Martín. Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, C/Pintor Baeza, 12. CP:03010. Spain. maripazvm@gmail.com.
N Jiménez-Sepulveda
C Molina-Pardines
E Merino-Lucas
J Sánchez-Payá
J C Rodríguez
Hospital General Universitario de Alicante Doctor Balmis · ESInstituto de investigación sanitaria y biomédica de Alicante

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the validity of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen (Ag) detection for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in mildly infected or asymptomatic patients.

methodsObservational study to evaluate diagnostic tests. Non-hospitalized patients with indication for diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. The diagnostic test to be evaluated was the determination of Ag and as a reference standard to determine the presence of viral RNA the RT-PCR was used.

resultsA total of 494 patients were included. Of these 71.5% (353/494) had symptoms and 28.5% (141/494) were asymptomatic (presurgery screening (35/494) and confirmed case-contact (106/494). The overall sensitivity of the Ag test was 61.1% and the specificity was 99.7%. The sensitivity and specificity in the asymptomatic group were 40% and 100% respectively, and in the symptomatic group 63.5% and 99.6% respectively. In turn, the sensitivity and specificity in the group of symptomatic patients varied according to the time of symptom evolution: in patients with recent symptoms, they were 71.4% and 99.6% respectively, while in patients with symptoms of more than 5 days of evolution, they were 26.7% and 100% respectively. In all groups studied, the presence of antigen is associated with a high viral load (Ct<30 cycles).

conclusionsThe use of Ag detection test is not indicated for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in asymptomatic patients or with symptoms of more than 5 days of evolution, but it could be useful in patients with symptoms of 1-5 days of evolution.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2False Positive ReactionsHumansReference StandardsSensitivity and SpecificityantigenCOVID-19diagnosisSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34549577
PMCPMC8638769
OpenAlexW3199442899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.