ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2022
Diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 saliva antigen testing in a real-life clinical setting.
Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying the optimal rapid antigen test for screening and determining the end of isolation: A modeling study.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Determination of the Diagnostic Performance of Laboratory Tests in the Absence of a Perfect Reference Standard: The Case of SARS-CoV-2 Tests.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison of Nasal Swabs, Nasopharyngeal Swabs, and Saliva Samples for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 and other Respiratory Virus Infections.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Saliva as a Matrix for RT-PCR Analysis and Two Rapid Antigen Tests for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2.Viruses · 2022Article
- Infection of the oral cavity with SARS-CoV-2 variants: Scope of salivary diagnostics.Frontiers in oral health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSARS-CoV-2 antigen tests with saliva facilitate examination in settings that lack trained personnel. However, little is known about the diagnostic accuracy in real-life clinical settings. Therefore, we studied the diagnostic accuracy of a saliva antigen test in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection in a primary/secondary care testing facility.
methodsIndividuals who presented at a COVID-19 testing facility affiliated with a Swiss university hospital were prospectively recruited (n=377). Saliva specimen was obtained, and the PCL Inc. COVID19 Gold antigen test was conducted in parallel with 2 real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays from a nasopharyngeal swab.
resultsRT-PCR results were positive in 53 individuals, corresponding to a prevalence of 14.1% (missing material in 1 individual). The PCL saliva antigen test was positive in 22 individuals (5.8%) and negative in 354 (93.9%). The sensitivity of the saliva antigen test was 30.2% (95% confidence interval 18.3, 44.3), both overall and in symptomatic individuals. The specificity was 98.1% (96.0, 99.3).
conclusionsThe diagnostic accuracy of a SARS-CoV-2 saliva antigen test in a primary/secondary care testing facility was remarkably lower than that reported in the manufacturer's specifications.
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.