ReviewClinics in laboratory medicine2022
Clinical Diagnostic Point-of-Care Molecular Assays for SARS-CoV-2.
Review in Clinics in laboratory medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A multicenter study to assess the performance of the point-of-care RT-PCR Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B nucleic acid test for use on the Cobas Liat system in comparison with centralized assays across healthcare facilities in the United States.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Evaluation and comparison of one-step real-time PCR and one-step RT-LAMP methods for detection of SARS-CoV-2.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Development of an integrated sample amplification control for salivary point-of-care pathogen testing.Analytica chimica acta · 2024Article
- A novel viral RNA detection method based on the combined use of trans-acting ribozymes and HCR-FRET analyses.PloS one · 2024Article
- Development of an Integrated Sample Amplification Control for Salivary Point-of-Care Pathogen Testing.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Dataset from the comparative evaluation of the STANDARD M10 point-of-care analyzer versus the NeuMoDx assay for the molecular diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.Data in brief · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laboratories faced many challenges throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Point-of-care (POC) SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) provided a key solution to the need for rapid turnaround time in select patient populations and were implemented at the POC but also within laboratories to supplement traditional molecular assays. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-waived rapid POC SARS-CoV-2 NAATs offer the benefit of reduced educational requirements for operators and can be performed by non-laboratory-trained individuals. However, these methods must be validated to ensure the manufacturer's performance specifications are met and they are found to be fit-for-purpose in the clinical workflows they are implemented.
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.