ArticleBMC infectious diseases2022
RT-PCR negative COVID-19.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06047067 (BIOAEROSOL SAMPLING DEVICE), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
BIOAEROSOL SAMPLING DEVICE (BSD) CLINICAL STUDY: Performance of Respiratory Pathogen Bioaerosol Sampling Device Compared to Matched Swab Sample With Molecular and Antigen Assays That Can Detect SARS-CoV-2 Phase II Validation
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sniffer dogs performance is stable over time in detecting COVID-19 positive samples and agrees with the rapid antigen test in the field.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Co-infections and Reactivation of some Herpesviruses (HHV) and Measles Virus (MeV) in Egyptian Cancer Patients infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025Observational
- Rapid assays of SARS-CoV-2 virus and noble biosensors by nanomaterials.Nano convergence · 2024Review
- Can Nitazoxanide and/or other anti-viral medications be a solution to long COVID? Case report with a brief literature review.Clinical case reports · 2023Article
- Considerations of COVID-19 in Ophthalmology.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- Evaluation of ten (10) SARS-CoV-2 rapid serological tests in comparison with WANTAI SARS-CoV-2 ab ELISA in Burkina Faso, West Africa.Virology journal · 2023Article
- The Role of Computed Tomography in the Management of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.Cureus · 2023Review
- Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva: Implications for late-stage diagnosis and infectious duration.PloS one · 2023Observational
- Factors associated with mortality, length of hospital stay and diagnosis of COVID-19: Data from a field hospital.Journal of infection and public health · 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
18 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 is a multi-system infection with emerging evidence-based antiviral and anti-inflammatory therapies to improve disease prognosis. However, a subset of patients with COVID-19 signs and symptoms have repeatedly negative RT-PCR tests, leading to treatment hesitancy. We used comparative serology early in the COVID-19 pandemic when background seroprevalence was low to estimate the likelihood of COVID-19 infection among RT-PCR negative patients with clinical signs and/or symptoms compatible with COVID-19.
methodsBetween April and October 2020, we conducted serologic testing of patients with (i) signs and symptoms of COVID-19 who were repeatedly negative by RT-PCR ('Probables'; N = 20), (ii) signs and symptoms of COVID-19 but with a potential alternative diagnosis ('Suspects'; N = 15), (iii) no signs and symptoms of COVID-19 ('Non-suspects'; N = 43), (iv) RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients (N = 40), and (v) pre-pandemic samples (N = 55).
resultsProbables had similar seropositivity and levels of IgG and IgM antibodies as propensity-score matched RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients (60.0% vs 80.0% for IgG, p-value = 0.13; 50.0% vs 72.5% for IgM, p-value = 0.10), but multi-fold higher seropositivity rates than Suspects and matched Non-suspects (60.0% vs 13.3% and 11.6% for IgG; 50.0% vs 0% and 4.7% for IgM respectively; p-values < 0.01). However, Probables were half as likely to receive COVID-19 treatment than the RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients with similar disease severity.
conclusionsFindings from this study indicate a high likelihood of acute COVID-19 among RT-PCR negative with typical signs/symptoms, but a common omission of COVID-19 therapies among these patients. Clinically diagnosed COVID-19, independent of RT-PCR positivity, thus has a potential vital role in guiding treatment decisions.
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.