ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2021
The effectiveness of visual triaging and testing of suspected COVID-19 cases in primary care setting in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAsymptomatic individuals could be a source of spreading the infection, especially in their households. Triaging and testing an individual for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection rely on the criteria included in the adopted triaging instrument, and adopted case definition of a suspected case. They both may need to be reviewed and modified to make them more effective in making the right decision.
methodsA cross-sectional study was used to find out the effectiveness of triaging instrument and the case definition used in the fever clinic (FC) in one of our primary care centers. The data of 630 randomly selected participants who were tested in our center between April 12 and August 12 2020 were analyzed.
resultsAbout 36.8% of the 630 tested participants were positive for COVID-19. Symptomatic patients were 3.93 (95% CI; 2.58, 5.98;
conclusionAt the time of outbreak and pandemic, people get worried and need to be reassured, and contacts would then seek testing. However, resources including manpower, material, and money need to be protected and used wisely. Thus, the adoption of an evidence-based updated testing policy is crucially needed. Furthermore, early identification of the potential sources of the infection is also crucially needed to control the spreading of the infection.
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.