Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35636825›Full record

ReviewClinics in laboratory medicine2022

Performance of Non-nasopharyngeal Sample Types for Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Benjamin Kukull, Salika M Shakir, Kimberly E Hanson

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin KukullDepartment of Pathology, Cascade Pathology Services/Legacy Health, Portland, OR, USA.
Salika M ShakirDepartment of Pathology, Cascade Pathology Services/Legacy Health, Portland, OR, USA; ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Kimberly E HansonARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Electronic address: kim.hanson@hsc.utah.edu.
Cascade (United States) · USLegacy Health · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nasopharyngeal swabs have historically been considered the preferred specimen type for the detection of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2. However, in response to a global pandemic with shortages of swabs and specimen transport media, limited access to qualified health care personnel, and needs for large-scale testing in nonmedical settings, alternative sample types have been validated for COVID-19 diagnosis. The purpose of this review is to highlight the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of non-nasopharyngeal respiratory samples for SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic testing.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2COVID-19 TestingHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesAlternative specimenCOVID-19Molecular diagnosticNasopharyngeal swabNon-NP respiratory specimenSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35636825
PMCPMC8860668
OpenAlexW4212911791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.