ArticleMicrobiology spectrum2022
Investigating the Sensitivity of Nasal or Throat Swabs: Combination of Both Swabs Increases the Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Tests.
Article in Microbiology spectrum, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The effect of sample site and collection procedure on identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Performance of self-performed SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- COVID-19 rapid antigen tests approved for self-testing in Australia: published diagnostic test accuracy studies and manufacturer-supplied information. A systematic review.The Medical journal of Australia · 2023Pooled it
- Comparing SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19 self-testing/self-sampling with molecular and professional-use tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Nasal swab is a good alternative sample for detecting SARS-CoV-2 with rapid antigen test: A meta-analysis.Travel medicine and infectious diseasePooled it
- COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Tests With Self-Collected vs Health Care Worker-Collected Nasal and Throat Swab Specimens: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Evaluation of self-collection of nasal swab specimens for COVID-19 diagnostic testing in children in the United States, 2020-2023.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Taste dysfunction in Long COVID.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Plasmonic coffee-ring biosensing for AI-assisted point-of-care diagnostics.Nature communications · 2025Article
- COVID-19 study quantifying daily viral loads confirms throat samples are key to early diagnosis.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Validation of oral-nasal specimen collection for influenza and respiratory syncytial virus detection.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
- Validating Combination Throat-Nasal Swab Specimens for COVID-19 Tests Would Improve Early Detection, Especially for the Most Vulnerable.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Article
- Testing for SARS-CoV-2: lessons learned and current use cases.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC) for Patients-3-Year Follow-Up of Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Comparative Performance of COVID-19 Test Methods in Healthcare Workers during the Omicron Wave.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Taqman PACMAN: a simple molecular approach for positive rapid antigen test confirmation during periods of low prevalence.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Article
- Impact of Swabbing Location, Self-Swabbing, and Food Intake on SARS-CoV-2 RNA Detection.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Prospective, clinical comparison of self-collected throat-bilateral nares swabs and saline gargle compared to health care provider collected nasopharyngeal swabs among symptomatic outpatients with potential SARS-CoV-2 infection.Journal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada = Journal officiel de l'Association pour la microbiologie medicale et l'infectiologie Canada · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has been hallmarked by several waves of variants of concern (VoCs), each with novel challenges. Currently, the highly transmissible Omicron VoC is predominant worldwide, and sore throat is common, among other cold-like symptoms. Anecdotes on social media have suggested that sampling one's throat can increase the sensitivity for Omicron detection by antigen-based rapid testing devices (Ag-RDTs). This work aimed to improve the local testing strategy and determine whether the sensitivity of Ag-RDTs designed for nasal sampling is altered with the use of self-administered throat swabs in self-perceived asymptomatic individuals. This investigation used a common Ag-RDT (i.e., Abbott Panbio COVID-19 Ag rapid test device) to compare three sampling sites: nasal swab, throat swab, and combined nasal/throat. All Ag-RDT results were confirmed with molecular testing from residual test buffer. Compared to reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), samples from nasal or throat swabs each detected 64.5% of SARS-CoV-2 cases; however, combining the contributions of each swab increased the positive percent agreement (PPA) with RT-PCR to 88.7%. This trend was also evident with the Rapid Response Ag-RDT (BTNX), which uses more flexible swabs than does the Panbio. When nasal swab collection was compared to paired sampling of the nose/throat using a single swab with the Panbio Ag-RDT, the PPAs were 68.4% and 81.6%, respectively. No false-positive results were observed with nasal, throat, or combined nasal/throat sampling. Self-administered throat and nasal/throat swabs both had >90% acceptability. These findings support the use of self-collected combined nasal/throat sampling for Ag-RDT-based SARS-CoV-2 detection in self-perceived asymptomatic individuals.
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.