SynthesisJournal of virological methods2022
The Diagnostic Accuracy of Xpert Xpress to SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review.
Synthesis 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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Truenat® chip-based real-time PCR platform for infectious disease diagnostics.Practical laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of Two Field Deployable PCR Platforms for SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A and B Viruses' Detection.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 virus detection using the Xpert Xpress rapid molecular test on Abbott M2000 Real-Time System: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Cycle Threshold (Ct) Values of SARS-CoV-2 Detected with the GeneXpertCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2023Article
- Rapid Evaluation of the XpertDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Developing a Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay for the Rapid Detection of Seven Respiratory Viruses including SARS-CoV-2.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Four Fully Integrated Molecular Assays for the Detection of Respiratory Viruses during the Co-Circulation of SARS-CoV-2, Influenza and RSV.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Influenza A, Influenza B, and SARS-CoV-2 Similarities and Differences - A Focus on Diagnosis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, as well as mortality rate, is high. There is an urgent need for a high-throughput, accurate and reliable method of diagnosing COVID-19 pneumonia. We included references from databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase, and extracted data. Then, MetaDisc and STATA were used to establish forest plots and funnel plots for meta-analysis. We collected 14 articles and performed a systematic review. The following results were obtained: sensitivity and specificity were 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98) and 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98) respectively; PLR and NLR were 24.51 (16.63-36.12) and 0.03 (0.01 to 0.10) respectively, DOR was 975.15 (430.11-2210.88), and AUC was 0.9926. When Xpress detects SARS-CoV-2 in different samples, the heterogeneity is small and the specificity and sensitivity are extremely high. We recommend the employment of Xpert Xpress analysis in rapid screening.
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.