ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Pooled surveillance testing for asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections at a Veterinary Teaching Hospital College, University of Minnesota, December 2020-April 2021.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
To evaluate the use of asymptomatic surveillance, we implemented a surveillance program for asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in a voluntary sample of individuals at the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Minnesota. Self-collected anterior nasal samples were tested using real time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), in a 5:1 pooled testing strategy, twice weekly for 18 weeks. Positive pools were deconvoluted into individual tests, revealing an observed prevalence of 0.07% (3/4,525). Pooled testing allowed for large scale testing with an estimated cost savings of 79.3% and modeling demonstrated this testing strategy prevented up to 2 workplace transmission events, averting up to 4 clinical cases. At the study endpoint, antibody testing revealed 80.7% of participants had detectable vaccine antibody levels while 9.6% of participants had detectable antibodies to natural infection.
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.