ArticleJournal of virological methods2022
Pooled sample testing for COVID-19 diagnosis: Evaluation of bi-directional matrix pooling strategies.
Article in Journal of virological methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Breath Tests to Detect Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review.Lung · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic utility of real-time RT-PCR for chikungunya virus detection in the acute phase of infection: a retrospective study.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- One-year surveillance of last-resort antimicrobial resistance patterns in carbapenemase-producingGerms · 2025Article
- Optimizing COVID-19 testing strategies on college campuses: Evaluation of the health and economic costs.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- binGroup2: Statistical Tools for Infection Identification via Group Testing.The R journal · 2023Article
- An improvement of current hypercube pooling PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection.Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, pooled testing of samples by RT-PCR has been recommended at certain scenarios to increase labs' testing capacity and reduce cost of testing. This paper describes the evaluation of bi-directional matrix pooling strategies with clinical samples in a 5 × 5 and 10 × 10 matrix. Nasopharyngeal swab samples in viral transport medium (VTM) previously tested (positive or negative) by real time RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 were used for these experiments. Ten sets of 5 × 5 (250 samples) and ten sets of 10 × 10 (1000 samples) pooling of samples in both directions was done with known positive samples introduced at random positions. Extracted nucleic acid was tested for SARS-CoV-2 E-gene by RT-PCR. Sensitivity or concordance and feasibility of matrix pooling were assessed in comparison to direct RT-PCR testing. In comparison to direct testing, the overall concordance was 86.6% for 5 × 5 pooling, 73.3% for 10 × 10 with 200 µL extraction volume and 86.6% for 10 × 10 with 400 µL extraction volume. Bi-directional matrix pooling can be adopted with advantage over conventional direct or pool testing for COVID-19 by RT-PCR under the following conditions: i) sample positivity rate of ≤ 5%, ii) matrix pool size of 8-10 samples, iii) use of min. 40 µL VTM from each sample and iv) utilization of automated liquid handling equipment, if available, for sample addition to avoid human errors.
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.