ReviewBiosensors & bioelectronics: X2022
FDA authorized molecular point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 tests: A critical review on principles, systems and clinical performances.
Review in Biosensors & bioelectronics: X, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Pharmacies in Providing Point-of-Care Services in the Era of Digital Health and Artificial Intelligence: An Updated Review of Technologies, Regulation and Socioeconomic Considerations.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Nanobiosensors for Single-Molecule Diagnostics: Toward Integration with Super-Resolution Imaging.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Public Disclosure of Results From Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning Research in Health Care: Comprehensive Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and Scopus Data (2010-2023).Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Portable wide-field femtoliter-chamber imaging system for point-of-care digital bioanalysis.iScience · 2024Article
- A Finger-Actuated Sample-Dosing Capillary-Driven Microfluidic Device for Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification.Biosensors · 2024Article
- Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of the Pluslife Mini Dock RHAM technology with Abbott ID Now and Cepheid GenXpert: A retrospective evaluation study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Development of an integrated sample amplification control for salivary point-of-care pathogen testing.Analytica chimica acta · 2024Article
- Development of an Integrated Sample Amplification Control for Salivary Point-of-Care Pathogen Testing.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Multicenter evaluation of a simple and sensitive nucleic acid self-testing for SARS-CoV-2.Virologica Sinica · 2023Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Based on Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) and Its Integration into Nanomedicine and Microfluidic Devices as Point-of-Care Testing (POCT).International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- The Future of Point-of-Care Nucleic Acid Amplification Diagnostics after COVID-19: Time to Walk the Walk.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Nanotechnology meets immunology towards a rapid diagnosis solution: the COVID-19 outbreak challenge.RSC advances · 2022Article
- Rapid SARS-CoV-2 Detection Using the Lucira™ Check It COVID-19 Test Kit.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Editorial: New strategies and technologies enabling point of care diagnosis of neglected or tropical diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- SARS-CoV-2 variants: Impact on biological and clinical outcome.Frontiers in medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, 10 manufacturers of molecular tests for SARS-CoV-2 have received Emergency Use Authorizations from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for point-of-care or over the counter use. In this review, the working principle of these tests is described as well as the relevant characteristics (e.g. time-to-result and specimen type). The analytical (e.g. analytical sensitivity) and clinical performance (positive and negative percent agreement) and useability characteristics (e.g. cost, reusability and throughput) of these tests are compared and critically reviewed. Also details for relevant respiratory multiplex assays of these 10 manufacturers are discussed. Critical review of scientific literature on these authorized tests revealed that for many of these tests publications are almost or completely absent, with the exception of two systems. The Xpert Xpress has been thoroughly investigated and good performance has been reported, whereas ID NOW is also well-represented in literature, but has relatively low sensitivity.
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.