ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2021
Implementation and Accuracy of BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen COVID-19 Test in Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Populations in a High-Volume Self-Referred Testing Site.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Antigen Testing (January 2023).Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Guideline
- Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Nasal swab is a good alternative sample for detecting SARS-CoV-2 with rapid antigen test: A meta-analysis.Travel medicine and infectious diseasePooled it
- Acceptability and usability of COVID-19 antigen self-test in populations under socioeconomic vulnerability in Brazil: A cross-sectional study.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Antigen Card Test, Puerto Rico.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2024Article
- Self-administered versus clinician-performed BinaxNOW COVID rapid test: a comparison of accuracy.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Rapid Antigen Tests during the COVID-19 Era in Korea and Their Implementation as a Detection Tool for Other Infectious Diseases.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Progress in Biosensors for the Point-of-Care Diagnosis of COVID-19.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- High Sensitivity and NPV for BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen Test in Children at a Mass Testing Site during Prevalent Delta Variant Period.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- Limitations of Molecular and Antigen Test Performance for SARS-CoV-2 in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic COVID-19 Contacts.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Article
- The Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spatial Care Path: Home, Community, and Emergency Diagnostic Portals.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Detection of the Omicron Variant Virus With the Abbott BinaxNow SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Assay.Open forum infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Large-scale implementation of rapid antigen testing system for COVID-19 in workplaces.Science advances · 2022Article
- Rapid Antigen Test Sensitivity for Asymptomatic COVID-19 Screening.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid antigen tests are simple to perform and provide results within 15 min. We describe our implementation and assess performance of the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Antigen Test (Abbott Laboratories) in 6,099 adults at a self-referred walk-up testing site. Participants were grouped by self-reported COVID-19 exposure and symptom status. Most (89%) were asymptomatic, of whom 17% reported potential exposure. Overall test sensitivity compared with reference laboratory reverse-transcription [RT] PCR testing was 81% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75%, 86%). It was higher in symptomatic (87%; 95% CI 80%, 91%) than asymptomatic (71%; 95% CI 61%, 80%) individuals. Sensitivity was 82% (95% CI 66%, 91%) for asymptomatic individuals with potential exposure and 64% (95% CI 51%, 76%) for those with no exposure. Specificity was greater than 99% for all groups. BinaxNOW has high accuracy among symptomatic individuals and is below the FDA threshold for emergency use authorization in asymptomatic individuals. Nonetheless, rapid antigen testing quickly identifies positive among those with symptoms and/or close contact exposure and could expedite isolation and treatment.
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.