ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2022
Diagnostic Accuracy of an At-Home, Rapid Self-test for Influenza: Prospective Comparative Accuracy Study.
Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical lessons from a pragmatic randomized trial of home-based COVID-19 testing in rural Native American and Latino communities.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2024Trial
- Development and External Validation of the FluScoreVax Risk Score for Influenza That Incorporates Vaccine Status.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025Article
- Rapid diagnosis of acute pediatric respiratory infections with Point-of-Care and multiplex molecular testing.Infection · 2025Review
- Impact of Point-of-Care Testing on Diagnosis, Treatment, and Surveillance of Vaccine-Preventable Viral Infections.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Adult Influenza Patients Diagnosed by Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Tests, but Not Rapid Antigen Tests, and Managed Successfully During the 2024 to 2025 Major Influenza-Endemic Season in a Tertiary Hospital in Japan.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Phylogenetic and mutational analysis of H10N3 avian influenza A virus in China: potential threats to human health.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- A pragmatic randomized trial of home-based testing for COVID-19 in rural Native American and Latino communities: Protocol for the "Protecting our Communities" study.Contemporary clinical trials · 2022Article
- Requirements and Study Designs for U.S. Regulatory Approval of Influenza Home Tests.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Review
- Flu@home: the Comparative Accuracy of an At-Home Influenza Rapid Diagnostic Test Using a Prepositioned Test Kit, Mobile App, Mail-in Reference Sample, and Symptom-Based Testing Trigger.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2022Review
- At-home infectious disease testing: An idea whose time has come.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 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
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for influenza used by individuals at home could potentially expand access to testing and reduce the impact of influenza on health systems. Improving access to testing could lead to earlier diagnosis following symptom onset, allowing more rapid interventions for those who test positive, including behavioral changes to minimize spread. However, the accuracy of RDTs for influenza has not been determined in self-testing populations.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the accuracy of an influenza RDT conducted at home by lay users with acute respiratory illness compared with that of a self-collected sample by the same individual mailed to a laboratory for reference testing.
methodsWe conducted a comparative accuracy study of an at-home influenza RDT (Ellume) in a convenience sample of individuals experiencing acute respiratory illness symptoms. Participants were enrolled in February and March 2020 from the Greater Seattle region in Washington, United States. Participants were mailed the influenza RDT and reference sample collection materials, which they completed and returned for quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction influenza testing in a central laboratory. We explored the impact of age, influenza type, duration, and severity of symptoms on RDT accuracy and on cycle threshold for influenza virus and ribonuclease P, a marker of human DNA.
resultsA total of 605 participants completed all study steps and were included in our analysis, of whom 87 (14.4%) tested positive for influenza by quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (70/87, 80% for influenza A and 17/87, 20% for influenza B). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the RDT compared with the reference test were 61% (95% CI 50%-71%) and 95% (95% CI 93%-97%), respectively. Among individuals with symptom onset ≤72 hours, sensitivity was 63% (95% CI 48%-76%) and specificity was 94% (95% CI 91%-97%), whereas, for those with duration >72 hours, sensitivity and specificity were 58% (95% CI 41%-74%) and 96% (95% CI 93%-98%), respectively. Viral load on reference swabs was negatively correlated with symptom onset, and quantities of the endogenous marker gene ribonuclease P did not differ among reference standard positive and negative groups, age groups, or influenza subtypes. The RDT did not have higher sensitivity or specificity among those who reported more severe illnesses.
conclusionsThe sensitivity and specificity of the self-test were comparable with those of influenza RDTs used in clinical settings. False-negative self-test results were more common when the test was used after 72 hours of symptom onset but were not related to inadequate swab collection or severity of illness. Therefore, the deployment of home tests may provide a valuable tool to support the management of influenza and other respiratory infections.
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.