ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2022
Sensitivity and Specificity of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection Tests Using Oral, Anterior Nasal, and Nasopharyngeal Swabs: a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.
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 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19 self-testing/self-sampling with molecular and professional-use tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Nasal swab is a good alternative sample for detecting SARS-CoV-2 with rapid antigen test: A meta-analysis.Travel medicine and infectious diseasePooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive SARS-CoV-2 screening tests: a national prospective analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Trial
- Determining the optimal frequency of SARS-CoV-2 regular asymptomatic testing: A randomized feasibility trial in a home care setting.PloS one · 2024Trial
- Uptake, Acceptability, and Results of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Testing in Community Settings in Cameroon.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Frequent Point-of-Care Molecular COVID-19 Surveillance in a Rural Workplace: Nonrandomized Controlled Clinical Trial Among Miners.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Article
- Utility, comfort and feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic testing integration into routine care: a cross-sectional survey assessing healthcare workers' perspectives in Kenya and Cameroon.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Lessons learned: drive-through COVID-19 clinic testing during an adaptive epidemic response and a point-of-care test assessment of a computer-read rapid lateral flow immunoassay with fluorescence-based detection.Journal of medical microbiology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Antigen Card Test, Puerto Rico.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2024Article
- Article
- Digital droplet RT-LAMP increases speed of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA detection.Smart medicine · 2024Article
- Analyzing factors affecting positivity in drive-through COVID-19 testing: a cross-sectional study.Virology journal · 2024Article
- Impact of Swabbing Location, Self-Swabbing, and Food Intake on SARS-CoV-2 RNA Detection.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Application of Octenidine into Nasal Vestibules Does Not Influence SARS-CoV-2 Detection via PCR or Antigen Test Methods.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A machine learning classifier using 33 host immune response mRNAs accurately distinguishes viral and non-viral acute respiratory illnesses in nasal swab samples.Genome medicine · 2023Article
- LightR-YOLOv5: A compact rotating detector for SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic test results.Displays · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of our study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of rapid antigen detection tests versus those of reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) using oral, anterior nasal, and nasopharyngeal swabs. The underlying prospective, diagnostic case-control-type accuracy study included 87 hospitalized and nonhospitalized participants in a positive and a negative sample cohort between 16 March and 14 May 2021 in two hospitals in Vienna. SARS-CoV-2 infection status was confirmed by RT-PCR. Participants self-performed one oral and one anterior nasal swab for the rapid antigen test, immediately followed by two nasopharyngeal swabs for the rapid antigen test and RT-PCR by the investigator. Test results were read after 15 min, and participants completed a questionnaire in the meantime. Test parameters were calculated based on the evaluation of 87 participants. The overall sensitivity of rapid antigen detection tests versus that of RT-PCR with oral, anterior nasal, and nasopharyngeal samples was 18.18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.19% to 32.71%), 63.04% (95% CI 47.55% to 76.79%), and 73.33% (95% CI 58.06% to 85.4%), respectively. All sampling methods had a test specificity of 100% regardless of the cycle threshold (
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.