ArticleCentral-European journal of immunology2022
Validation of the test for detecting SARS--CoV-2 antigens in the Polish population in patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Article in Central-European journal of immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical accuracy of instrument-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen diagnostic tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Virology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of a novel antigen-capture ELISA for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.Analytical biochemistry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that China had accumulated pneumonia of unclear etiology in Wuhan. According to WHO recommendations, in strictly defined situations, antigen tests can be implemented into the diagnostic algorithm to reduce the number of molecular tests performed and support the rapid identification and treatment of COVID-19 patients. According to WHO recommendations, the antigen test for diagnostic use should have a sensitivity of ≥ 80% and a specificity of ≥ 97% compared to molecular tests (NAAT). Based on the comparative analysis, the sensitivity and specificity of the SARS-CoV-2 Antigen ELISA test were determined concerning the RT-PCR reference method. The sensitivity of the SARS-CoV-2 Antigen ELISA was 100% (51/51) and the specificity was 98.84%. The obtained data demonstrate that the analyzed antigen test meets both the WHO and the Ministry of Health criteria.
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.