ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Large-Scale SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Testing With Real-World Specimens.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Development and evaluation of three automated media pooling and molecular diagnostic systems for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Automated antigen assays display a high heterogeneity for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including several Omicron sublineages.Medical microbiology and immunology · 2023Article
- Virus variant-specific clinical performance of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test with focus on Omicron variants of concern.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2023Article
- Accuracy of an antigen-detecting SARS-CoV-2 assay with self- and provider-collected specimens interpreted visually and with BD Veritor™ Plus analyzer.Journal of clinical virology plus · 2023Article
- Clinical performance evaluation of BD SARS-CoV-2 reagents for BD MAXDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines against symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in an urgent care setting.Vaccine · 2023Article
- Clinical practice of rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant: A single-center study in China.Virologica Sinica · 2022Article
- Development, testing and validation of a SARS-CoV-2 multiplex panel for detection of the five major variants of concern on a portable PCR platform.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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Real-world data are needed to establish SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing (RAT) as an effective and reliable approach for SARS-CoV-2 screening. This study included 1,952,931 individuals who provided upper respiratory specimens during SARS-CoV-2 screening at CityMD urgent care locations in the New York metropolitan area from October 2020 to March 2021. Positive and negative results, as determined by the BD Veritor™ System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen (Veritor), were obtained for all individuals, with reflex reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing performed on a case-by-case basis, per standard of care. Using verification bias adjustment, two alternative model assumptions were utilized for RAT results with missing reflex RT-PCR results. The worst antigen diagnostic performance estimates asserted that missing RT-PCR results would show a distribution similar to those RT-PCR results actually obtained, based on symptom category. The best antigen diagnostic performance estimates asserted that individuals without RT-PCR results had a clinical presentation consistent with RAT results, and, therefore, missing RT-PCR results would agree with RAT results. For patients with symptoms or high-risk exposure, 25.3% (
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.