ArticleACS omega2022
DirectDetect SARS-CoV-2 Direct Real-Time RT-PCR Study Using Patient Samples.
Article in ACS omega, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory-based molecular test alternatives to RT-PCR for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Rapid assays of SARS-CoV-2 virus and noble biosensors by nanomaterials.Nano convergence · 2024Review
- Evaluation of the AdvanSure One-Stop COVID-19 Plus Kit for SARS-CoV-2 Detection Using a Streamlined RNA Extraction Method.Annals of laboratory medicine · 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
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
COVID-19 is an infectious disease that caused a global pandemic affecting people worldwide. As disease detection and vaccine rollout continue to progress, there is still a need for efficient diagnostic tools to satisfy continued testing needs. This preliminary study evaluated a novel SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test called DirectDetect SARS-CoV-2 Direct Real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) based on a limited sample size of 24 respiratory samples from 14 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. The test is advantageous compared to others on the market since it does not require viral transport medium or viral RNA extraction prior to nucleic acid amplification and detection. This capability transforms the hours-long sample preparation time into a minutes-long procedure while also eliminating the need for many costly reagents which may be difficult to obtain during the surge in nucleic acid-based testing during the pandemic. The results show a positive agreement of 94.7, 100, and 94.7% between dry sample swabs, treated samples, and untreated samples tested using the DirectDetect SARS-CoV-2 Direct Real-time RT-PCR compared to tests used in a clinical laboratory, respectively. The findings indicate that DirectDetect can be used for multiple different sample types while reducing the number of reagents and time needed for diagnosis. Although this study shows promising results using the DirectDetect results, further validation of this test using a larger sample set is required to assess the true performance of this test.
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.