ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2022
Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection in nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, and gargle samples.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sensitivity of gargle samples compared to swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection with nucleic acid amplification testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Virology journal · 2026Pooled it
- Application of oral fluid for quantitative nucleic acid and antibody detection of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-reactive salivary antibody detection in South Carolina emergency healthcare workers, September 2019-March 2020.Epidemiology and infection · 2024Article
- Diagnostic performance, stability, and acceptability of self-collected saliva without additives for SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnosis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 virus in saliva, stool, and urine samples of COVID-19 patients in Bihar, India.Access microbiology · 2024Article
- Clinical Performance of Self-Collected Purified Water Gargle for Detection of Influenza a Virus Infection by Real-Time RT-PCR.Infection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Influenza A, like Omicron SARS-CoV-2, Is Similarly Detected in Saliva or Nasopharyngeal Samples via RT-qPCR.Viruses · 2023Article
- Recent advances in RNA sample preparation techniques for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva and gargle.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2023Review
- Salivary SARS-CoV-2 RNA for diagnosis of COVID-19 patients: a systematic revisew and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.The Japanese dental science review · 2023Review
- COVID-19 impedimetric biosensor based on polypyrrole nanotubes, nickel hydroxide and VHH antibody fragment: specific, sensitive, and rapid viral detection in saliva samples.Materials today. Chemistry · 2023Article
- User acceptability of saliva and gargle samples for identifying COVID-19 positive high-risk workers and household contacts.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2022Article
- SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Variants Surge in Curitiba, Southern Brazil, and Its Impact on Overall COVID-19 Lethality.Viruses · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The nasopharyngeal swab is a gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2. However, the inconvenience of this method compelled us to compare its efficiency with saliva and gargle samples, which we collected sequentially from 229 individuals. Saliva outperformed gargle samples, constituting a reliable RNA viral source with similar performance to nasopharyngeal samples.
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.