ArticleScientific reports2021
Development, evaluation of the PNA RT-LAMP assay for rapid molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution and Impact of Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) for Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease.Analytical chemistry · 2024Review
- Article
- Novel aerosol detection platform for SARS‑CoV‑2: Based on specific magnetic nanoparticles adsorption sampling and digital droplet PCR detection.Chinese chemical letters = Zhongguo hua xue kuai bao · 2023Article
- Artificial genetic polymers against human pathologies.Biology direct · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dual-labeled PNA probe used RT-LAMP molecular rapid assay targeting SARS-CoV-2 ORF1ab and N genes was developed, and the analytical, clinical performances for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA extracted from clinical nasopharyngeal swab specimens were evaluated in this study. Data showed that this assay is highly specific for SARS-CoV-2, and the absolute detection limit is 1 genomic copy per microliter of viral RNA which can be considered to be comparable to gold-standard molecular diagnostic method real-time reverse transcriptase PCR. Both clinical sensitivity and specificity against a commercial real-time RT-PCR assay were determined as identical. In conclusion, the PNA RT-LAMP assay showed high analytical and clinical accuracy which are identical to real-time RT-PCR which has been routinely used for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
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.