ArticleJournal of acute medicine2022
Guidelines for COVID-19 Laboratory Testing for Emergency Departments From the New Diagnostic Technology Team of the Taiwan Society of Emergency Medicine.
Article in Journal of acute medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and healthcare burden of inappropriate antimicrobial treatment in patients at high risk of complications from acute respiratory infections: a scoping review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- [Implementation of isotermic PCR for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024Article
- Breaking Boundaries in Pneumonia Diagnostics: Transitioning from Tradition to Molecular Frontiers with Multiplex PCR.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
COVID-19 tests have different turnaround times (TATs), accuracy levels, and limitations, which emergency physicians should be aware of. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) can be divided into standard high throughput tests and rapid molecular diagnostic tests at the point of care (POC). The standard NAAT has the advantages of high throughput and high accuracy with a TAT of 3-4 hours. The POC molecular test has the same advantages of high accuracy as standard high throughput PCR, but can be done in 13-45 minutes. Roche cobas Liat is the most commonly used machine in Taiwan, displaying 99%-100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, respectively. Abbott ID NOW is an isothermal PCR-based POC machine with a sensitivity of 79% and a specificity of 100%. A high rate of false positives and false negatives is associated with rapid antigen testing. Antibody testing is mostly used as part of public health surveys and for testing for immunity.
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.