ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021
Evaluation of Panbio rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients and their contacts: a multicenter study.
Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Accuracy of rapid point-of-care antigen-based diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression analyzing influencing factors.PLoS medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Rapid antigen test as a screening tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection: Head-to-head comparison with qRT-PCR in Ethiopia.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Clinical evaluation of DIAGNOVIR SARS-CoV-2 ultra-rapid antigen test performance compared to PCR-based testing.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Panbio COVID-19 antigen rapid test device for SARS-CoV-2 detection in Kenya, 2021: A field evaluation.PloS one · 2023Article
- Tübingen model study: large-scale introduction of rapid antigen testing in the population and the viral dynamics of SARS-CoV-2.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Impact of antigen test target failure and testing strategies on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 variants.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Performance of the Rapid Antigen Test as a Screening Tool for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Emergency Department.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Performance of Antigen Detection Tests for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care rapid tests to identify SARS-CoV-2 can have clinical benefits.
methodsA cross-sectional study in adults visiting emergency services or screening sites of referral hospitals for COVID-19 to validate the diagnostic performance of a rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 (Abbott's Panbio) compared with reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Tests were performed by health personnel in a routine situation during a COVID-19 outbreak.
resultsA total of 1060 participants (mean age 47, 46% with a self-reported comorbidity) were recruited from 8 hospitals in Mexico. Participants provided 1060 valid Panbio rapid test-RT-PCR test pairs with 45% testing positive in the RT-PCR. Overall sensitivity of the Panbio test was 54.2% (95% CI 51%-57%), and 69.1% (95% CI 66%-73%) for patients during the first week of symptoms. Sensitivity depended on viral load (cycle threshold (Ct) of RT-PCR) and days of symptoms. With a Ct ≤25, sensitivity was 82% (95% CI, 76%-87%). Specificity of the Panbio test was >97.8% in all groups.
conclusionsThe Panbio rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2 had good specificity but low sensitivity. A negative test requires confirmation with RT-PCR, especially for testing after the first week of symptoms.
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.