Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35044220›Full record

ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2022

Performance of Three Tests for SARS-CoV-2 on a University Campus Estimated Jointly with Bayesian Latent Class Modeling.

T Alex Perkins, Melissa Stephens, Wendy Alvarez Barrios, Sean Cavany, Liz Rulli, Michael E Pfrender

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

T Alex PerkinsDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Damegrid.131063.6, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7518-4014
Melissa StephensGenomics and Bioinformatics Core Facility, University of Notre Damegrid.131063.6, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
Wendy Alvarez BarriosNotre Dame Research, University of Notre Damegrid.131063.6, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
Sean CavanyDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Damegrid.131063.6, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
Liz RulliNotre Dame Research, University of Notre Damegrid.131063.6, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
Michael E PfrenderDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Damegrid.131063.6, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA.
University of Notre Dame · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been critical in efforts to control its spread. The accuracy of tests for SARS-CoV-2 has been assessed numerous times, usually in reference to a gold standard diagnosis. One major disadvantage of that approach is the possibility of error due to inaccuracy of the gold standard, which is especially problematic for evaluating testing in a real-world surveillance context. We used an alternative approach known as Bayesian latent class modeling (BLCM), which circumvents the need to designate a gold standard by simultaneously estimating the accuracy of multiple tests. We applied this technique to a collection of 1,716 tests of three types applied to 853 individuals on a university campus during a 1-week period in October 2020. We found that reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) testing of saliva samples performed at a campus facility had higher sensitivity (median, 92.3%; 95% credible interval [CrI], 73.2 to 99.6%) than RT-PCR testing of nasal samples performed at a commercial facility (median, 85.9%; 95% CrI, 54.7 to 99.4%). The reverse was true for specificity, although the specificity of saliva testing was still very high (median, 99.3%; 95% CrI, 98.3 to 99.9%). An antigen test was less sensitive and specific than both of the RT-PCR tests, although the sample sizes with this test were small and the statistical uncertainty was high. These results suggest that RT-PCR testing of saliva samples at a campus facility can be an effective basis for surveillance screening to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a university setting.

Indexed as

Antigens, ViralBayes TheoremCOVID-19COVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingHumansPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceReproducibility of ResultsSalivaSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificitySevere acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirusUniversitiesYoung AdultAntigens, ViralBayesian statisticsCOVID-19epidemiologymolecular diagnosticpublic health surveillanceRT-PCRSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35044220
PMCPMC8768831
OpenAlexW4205227918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.