ArticleJournal of virological methods2022
COVID-19 PCR test performance on samples stored at ambient temperature.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endogenous Biomarkers Analysis and False-Negative Results for SARSCov2 Using two Commercial RT-PCR Diagnostic Kits.Iranian journal of pathology · 2026Article
- How to better select SARS-CoV-2 preservation solution of virus nucleic acid testing.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2023Article
- Taking a step back from testing: Preanalytical considerations in molecular infectious disease diagnostics.Clinical biochemistry · 2023Review
- Size distribution and relationship of airborne SARS-CoV-2 RNA to indoor aerosol in hospital ward environments.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Analysis of CT scan images for COVID-19 pneumonia based on a deep ensemble framework with DenseNet, Swin transformer, and RegNet.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Effect of delay in processing and storage temperature on diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 by RTPCR testing.Indian journal of medical microbiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The WHO-named Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection had become a pandemic within a short time period since it was detected in Wuhan. The outbreak required the screening of millions of samples daily and overwhelmed diagnostic laboratories worldwide. During this pandemic, the handling of patient specimens according to the universal guidelines was extremely difficult as the WHO, CDC and ECDC required cold chain compliance during transport and storage of the swab samples. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two different storage conditions on the COVID-19 real-time PCR assay on 30 positive nasopharyngeal and/or oropharyngeal samples stored at both ambient temperature (22 ± 2 °C) and +4 °C. The results revealed that all the samples stored at ambient temperature remain PCR positive for at least six days without any false-negative result. In conclusion, transporting and storing these types of swab samples at ambient temperature for six days under resource-limited conditions during the COVID-19 pandemics are acceptable.
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.