ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2022
Comparison of Real-Q 2019-nCoV and DaAn Gene 2019-nCoV polymerase chain reaction assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Concordance of Two- and Three-Gene SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Assays in Cameroon: Implications for Efficient Pandemic Response in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2026Article
- Comparison of two polymerase chain reaction assays, DaAn Gene (DaAn Gene 2019-ncov) and Cepheid (Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2) for Delta and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 detection in Yaoundé, Cameroon.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Article
- Lower Limb Paralysis Associated with Chikungunya in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Survey Report.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Detection Systems Using Clinical Samples and Standard Material: A Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison of Real-Q 2019-nCoV and DaAn Gene 2019-nCoV polymerase chain reaction assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarious nucleic acid amplification assays for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection have been developed, and there is a need to assess their test performance relative to one another. The aim of this study was to compare the performance characteristics of the Biosewoom Real-Q 2019-nCoV assay targeting the E and RdRP genes to DaAn Gene 2019-nCoV kit targeting the N gene and ORF1ab in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.
methodsWe performed a diagnostic comparison study by testing nasopharyngeal samples for SARS-CoV-2 using the two reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays. Assay agreement was assessed by overall percent agreement, negative percent agreement, positive percent agreement, and Cohen's kappa coefficient.
resultsA total of 48 nasopharyngeal samples were tested using the two assays. One sample was invalid, and three showed inconclusive results with Real-Q; hence, 44 were included for the comparative analysis. Overall, percent agreement between the assays was 93.2% (95% CI 81.3%-98.6%), Positive percent agreement (PPA) was 86.4% (95% CI 65.1%-97.1%) and negative percent agreement (NPA) was 100% (95% CI 84.6%-100%). The kappa coefficient was 0.86 (95% CI 0.72-1.01). Three samples (6.8%) were positive with DaAn gene kit and negative with Real-Q. The fluorescence intensity for Real-Q reporter dyes was low.
conclusionThe two kits showed high levels of concordance in their detection of SARS-CoV-2 despite having different gene targets. The Biosewoom kit can be improved through addressing the fluorescence intensity of the target dyes, and feedback was given to the manufacturer.
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.