Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34679467›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

The Use of Saliva as a Biosample in the Light of COVID-19.

Irena Duś-Ilnicka, Elżbieta Krala, Paulina Cholewińska, Małgorzata Radwan-Oczko

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

4 authors.

Irena Duś-IlnickaOral Pathology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Wroclaw Medical University, ul. Krakowska 26, 50-425 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4745-2560
Elżbieta KralaOral Pathology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Wroclaw Medical University, ul. Krakowska 26, 50-425 Wroclaw, Poland.
Paulina CholewińskaInstitute of Animal Breeding, Faculty of Biology and Animal Breeding, Wroclaw University of Enviromental and Life Sciences, ul. Chełmońskiego 38C, 51-630 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5880-6400
Małgorzata Radwan-OczkoOral Pathology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Wroclaw Medical University, ul. Krakowska 26, 50-425 Wroclaw, Poland.

Funding

Uniwersytet Medyczny im. Piastów Slaskich we Wroclawiu SUB.B150.19.048.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saliva is easy to collect and a biofluid that is readily available without the need for special equipment for its collection. The collection process, which is non-invasive and inexpensive, leads to obtaining a biomaterial that can serve as a source of information for molecular diagnostics of diseases in general medicine, genetics and dentistry. Unfortunately, many of the salivary methodologies are lacking important parameters to provide for not only the safety of the operator, but also the quality and reproducibility of the research. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, salivary diagnostics demonstrate a great potential for research of SARS-CoV 2. In this review, good practice for unstimulated saliva collection and patient preparation was provided, based on the latest literature and available guidelines. Schemes for saliva collection procedures were presented following an extended literature search. Descriptions of salivary probes/cups, techniques of saliva collection, and the use of specific buffering solutions for the stability of collected samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection were also evaluated.

Indexed as

biobankingCOVID-19oral microbiomesalivaomicsSARS-CoV 2

Identifiers

PMID34679467
PMCPMC8534561

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.