Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35543272›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2022

Virological and Serological Assessment of US Army Trainees Isolated for Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Shilpa Hakre, Ines Lakhal-Naouar, David B King, Jennifer L Burns, Kenya N Jackson, Stephen W Krauss, Prabha Chandrasekaran, Melanie D McCauley, Brittany L Ober Shepherd, Samantha McHenry and 18 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors.

Shilpa HakreWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Ines Lakhal-NaouarHenry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MarylandUSA.
David B KingHenry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MarylandUSA.
Jennifer L BurnsWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Pilot Bioproduction Facility, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Kenya N JacksonWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Experimental Therapeutics, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Stephen W KraussWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Center for Military Psychiatry and Neuroscience, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Prabha ChandrasekaranHenry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MarylandUSA.
Melanie D McCauleyWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Brittany L Ober ShepherdWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Samantha McHenryHenry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MarylandUSA.
Elizabeth J BianchiWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Jason OuelletteHenry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MarylandUSA.
Janice M DardenHenry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc., Bethesda, MarylandUSA.
Aaron D SanbornWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Clinical Trials Center, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Sharon P DayeWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, One Health Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Paul O KwonProgram Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation, Orlando, Florida, USA.
Jeremiah StubbsFort Belvoir, Occupational Medicine, Virginia, USA.
Crystal L BriganttiDiLorenzo Pentagon Health Clinic, Optometry, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Tara L HallMoncrief Army Health Clinic, Fort Jackson, South Carolina, USA.
Milford H Beagle10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum, New York, USA.
Jason A PieriUnited States Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, South Carolina, USA.
Timothy R FrambesUnited States Army Training Center, Fort Jackson, South Carolina, USA.
Robert J O'ConnellWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Kayvon ModjarradWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Clinton K MurrayBrooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA.
Linda L JagodzinskiWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Diagnostics and Countermeasures Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Paul T ScottWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Sheila A PeelWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Diagnostics and Countermeasures Branch, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaboratory screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a key mitigation measure to avoid the spread of infection among recruits starting basic combat training in a congregate setting. Because viral nucleic acid can be detected persistently after recovery, we evaluated other laboratory markers to distinguish recruits who could proceed with training from those who were infected.

methodsRecruits isolated for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were serially tested for SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic ribonucleic acid (sgRNA), and viral load (VL) by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and for anti- SARS-CoV-2. Cluster and quadratic discriminant analyses of results were performed.

resultsAmong 229 recruits isolated for COVID-19, those with a RT-PCR cycle threshold >30.49 (sensitivity 95%, specificity 96%) or having sgRNA log10 RNA copies/mL <3.09 (sensitivity and specificity 96%) at entry into isolation were likely SARS-CoV-2 uninfected. Viral load >4.58 log10 RNA copies/mL or anti-SARS-CoV-2 signal-to-cutoff ratio <1.38 (VL: sensitivity and specificity 93%; anti-SARS-CoV-2: sensitivity 83%, specificity 79%) had comparatively lower sensitivity and specificity when used alone for discrimination of infected from uninfected.

conclusionsOrthogonal laboratory assays used in combination with RT-PCR may have utility in determining SARS-CoV-2 infection status for decisions regarding isolation.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingHumansReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionRNARNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificityRNARNA, ViralArmy recruitcycle threshold valueisolationSARS-CoV-2sgRNA

Identifiers

PMID35543272
PMCPMC9129211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.