ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Self-Collected Samples to Detect SARS-CoV-2: Direct Comparison of Saliva, Tongue Swab, Nasal Swab, Chewed Cotton Pads and Gargle Lavage.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensitivity of gargle samples compared to swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection with nucleic acid amplification testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Virology journal · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Clinical Performance of Self-Collected Purified Water Gargle for Detection of Influenza a Virus Infection by Real-Time RT-PCR.Infection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Recent advances in RNA sample preparation techniques for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva and gargle.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2023Review
- Quantitative analysis of different respiratory specimens on two automated test systems for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2023Article
- Maternal plasma and salivary anelloviruses in pregnancy and preterm birth.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Non-Invasive Gargle Lavage Sampling for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Using rRT-PCR or Antigen Assay.Viruses · 2022Article
- Performance of nasopharyngeal swab and saliva in detecting Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- Performance Analysis of Self-Collected Nasal and Oral Swabs for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Clinical Performance of Self-Collected Nasal Swabs and Antigen Rapid Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Detection in Resource-Poor Settings.Biomedicines · 2022Article
- Evaluation of water gargle samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection using Abbott ID NOW COVID-19 assay.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- Reply to Fabbris et al. A Viable Alternative. Comment on "Kohmer et al. Self-Collected Samples to Detect SARS-CoV-2: Direct Comparison of Saliva, Tongue Swab, Nasal Swab, Chewed Cotton Pads and Gargle Lavage.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- A Viable Alternative. Comment on Kohmer et al. Self-Collected Samples to Detect SARS-CoV-2: Direct Comparison of Saliva, Tongue Swab, Nasal Swab, Chewed Cotton Pads and Gargle Lavage.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Advanced Molecular and Immunological Diagnostic Methods to Detect SARS-CoV-2 Infection.Microorganisms · 2022Review
- Acceptability of Community Saliva Testing in Controlling the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned from Two Case Studies in Nursing Homes and Schools.Patient preference and adherence · 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (
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.