ArticleInfection2022
Cycle threshold responses in SARS-COV2 PCR tests depend on the method by which the samples were obtained and require strict global standardization.
Article in Infection, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing oropharyngeal swabbing techniques: the relationship between force applied and SARS-CoV-2 detection sensitivity.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2025Article
- Association between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody status and reinfection: A case-control study nested in a Colorado-based prospective cohort study.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSince 2020, a SARS-COV2 epidemic has been raging worldwide. The cycle of the PCR test in which the virus is detected is called cycle threshold (CT). The method of obtaining the sample is not detailed in any published study and is based on general guidelines of the CDC. Our contention is that the manner in which the sample is obtained has a dramatic effect on CT values.
methodsFor each person suspected of having Covid-19 who arrives at the emergency room, two swabs are taken in succession, one according to CDC guidelines and the other according to "Ziv" guidelines. The Ziv method sample collection guidelines determine the depth of penetration, the number of rotations of the swab, and their direction. Each double sample was sent for analysis.
resultsAnalysis of the CT results of the sample to results methods and of the Seegene platform clearly found (p = 0.003 and p = 0.001, respectively) that more rigorous sample collection yielded lower CT values.
conclusionThe method of obtaining the samples had a dramatic effect on CT results. Any publication that includes CT results, and certainly studies that discuss CT kinetics, must describe in detail the method by which the samples were obtained. In places where it is also important to detect the onset of illness (airports, hospitals, schools, etc.), it is important to use the Ziv method to reduce the risk of false negatives.
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.