ArticlePloS one2022
Nasopharyngeal swabs vs. saliva sampling for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A cross-sectional survey of acceptability for caregivers and children after experiencing both methods.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of seropositivity to SARS-CoV-2 over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in adolescents in a longitudinal cohort study in Cebu, Philippines.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Acceptability and feasibility of oral swabs for tuberculosis diagnosis in young children: a qualitative study from Uganda and Peru.Frontiers in tuberculosis · 2026Article
- Point-of-need one-pot multiplexed RT-LAMP test for detecting three common respiratory viruses in saliva.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2025Article
- Detection of Respiratory Pathogens in Saliva and Mouthwash Samples in Children.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2025Article
- A One-Pot RT-LAMP Diagnostic Assay for SARS-CoV‑2 from Saliva Samples.ACS measurement science au · 2025Article
- Saliva Has High Sensitivity and Specificity for Detecting SARS-CoV-2 Compared to Nasal Swabs but Exhibits Different Viral Dynamics from Days of Symptom Onset.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A descriptive study on feasibility of nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab collection from pediatric research participants in Cebu, Philippines.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
- Influence parental- and child-related factors on the acceptance of SARS-CoV-2 test methods in schools and daycare facilities.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Diagnostic testing preferences can help inform future public health response efforts: Global insights from an international survey.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Article
- SARS-CoV-2 testing in the Slovak Republic from March 2020 to September 2022 - summary of the pandemic trends.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Predicting Nasopharyngeal Depth in Children Using Body Measurements: A Pilot Study.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialeArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSaliva sampling is a promising alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing, but acceptability data is lacking. We characterize the acceptability of saliva sampling and nasopharyngeal swabs for primary decision makers and their children after experiencing both testing modalities.
methodsWe administered a cross-sectional survey to participants aged 6-to-17 years and their primary decision makers at an Ottawa community COVID-19 testing centre in March 2021. Included were participants meeting local guidelines for testing. Excluded were those identified prior to participation as having inability to complete the consent, sampling, or survey process. Acceptability in multiple hypothetical scenarios was rated using a 5-point Likert scale. Pain was measured using the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R). Preference for testing was assessed with direct binary questions.
results48 participants and 48 primary decision makers completed the survey. Nasopharyngeal swab acceptability differed between scenarios, ranging 79% [95%CI: 66, 88] to 100% [95%CI: 95, 100]; saliva sampling acceptability was similar across scenarios, ranging 92% [95%CI: 82, 97] to 98% [95%CI: 89, 99]. 58% of youth described significant pain with nasopharyngeal swabbing, versus none with saliva sampling. 90% of children prefer saliva sampling. 66% of primary decision makers would prefer nasopharyngeal swabbing if it were 10% more sensitive.
conclusionThough youth prefer saliva sampling over nasopharyngeal swabs, primary decision makers present for testing remain highly accepting of both. Acceptance of nasopharyngeal swabs, however, varies with the testing indication and is influenced by perceived test accuracy. Understanding factors that influence sampling acceptance will inform more successful testing strategies.
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.