Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36076617›Full record

ReviewBiomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie2022

Recent advances in point of care testing for COVID-19 detection.

Renata Salgado Fernandes, Juliana de Oliveira Silva, Karina Braga Gomes, Ricardo Bentes Azevedo, Danyelle M Townsend, Adriano de Paula Sabino, Andre Luis Branco de Barros

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Renata Salgado FernandesDepartment of Clinical and Toxicological Analyses, Faculty of Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Juliana de Oliveira SilvaDepartment of Clinical and Toxicological Analyses, Faculty of Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Karina Braga GomesDepartment of Clinical and Toxicological Analyses, Faculty of Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Ricardo Bentes AzevedoDepartment of Genetics and Morphology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasilia 70910-900, Brazil.
Danyelle M TownsendDepartment of Drug Discovery and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, USA.
Adriano de Paula SabinoDepartment of Clinical and Toxicological Analyses, Faculty of Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Andre Luis Branco de BarrosDepartment of Clinical and Toxicological Analyses, Faculty of Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Electronic address: brancodebarros@yahoo.com.br.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRMedical University of South Carolina · USUniversidade de Brasília · BR

Funding

SOUTH CAROLINA COBRE IN OXIDANTS, REDOX BALANCE AND STRESS SIGNALINGP20GM103542 · NIGMS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BALL, LAUREN ELIZABETH · 2012 to 2020
$20.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organizations declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic was a milestone for the scientific community. The high transmission rate and the huge number of deaths, along with the lack of knowledge about the virus and the evolution of the disease, stimulated a relentless search for diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines. The main challenges were the differential diagnosis of COVID-19 and the development of specific, rapid, and sensitive tests that could reach all people. RT-PCR remains the gold standard for diagnosing COVID-19. However, new methods, such as other molecular techniques and immunoassays emerged. Also, the need for accessible tests with quick results boosted the development of point of care tests (POCT) that are fast, and automated, with high precision and accuracy. This assay reduces the dependence on laboratory conditions and mass testing of the population, dispersing the pressure regarding screening and detection. This review summarizes the advances in the diagnostic field since the pandemic started, emphasizing various laboratory techniques for detecting COVID-19. We reviewed the main existing diagnostic methods, as well as POCT under development, starting with RT-PCR detection, but also exploring other nucleic acid techniques, such as digital PCR, loop-mediated isothermal amplification-based assay (RT-LAMP), clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), and next-generation sequencing (NGS), and immunoassay tests, and nanoparticle-based biosensors, developed as portable instruments for the rapid standard diagnosis of COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19Clinical Laboratory TechniquesCOVID-19 TestingHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesPandemicsPoint-of-Care TestingRNA, ViralSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificityRNA, ViralCOVID-19CRISPRDiagnosisImmunoassayNanobiosensorsPoint-of-care testingRT-LAMPRT-PCRSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID36076617
PMCPMC9371983
OpenAlexW4291152117

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.