ArticleJournal of clinical virology plus2022
SARS-CoV-2 Omicron detection by antigen tests using saliva.
Article in Journal of clinical virology plus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective study of three saliva qualitative antigen testing kits for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 among mainly symptomatic patients in Japan.Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy · 2023Observational
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Omicron emerged in November 2021 and became the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant globally. It spreads more rapidly than ancestral lineages and its rapid detection is critical for the prevention of disease outbreaks. Antigen tests such as immunochromatographic assay (ICA) and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) yield results more quickly than standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, their utility for the detection of the Omicron variant remains unclear. We herein evaluated the performance of ICA and CLEIA in saliva from 51 patients with Omicron and 60 PCR negative individuals. The sensitivity and specificity of CLEIA were 98.0% (95%CI: 89.6-100.0%) and 100.0% (95%CI: 94.0-100.0%), respectively, with fine correlation with cycle threshold (Ct) values. The sensitivity and specificity of ICA were 58.8% (95%CI: 44.2-72.4%) and 100.0% (95%CI: 94.0-100.0%), respectively. The sensitivity of ICA was 100.0% (95%CI: 80.5-100.0%) when PCR Ct was less than 25. The Omicron can be efficiently detected in saliva by CLEIA. ICA also detects high viral load Omicron using saliva.
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.