ReviewJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
Saliva as a propitious diagnostic biofluid, biomarker, and bodies first line of defense against COVID-19: A review.
Review in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 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
This review aims to recognize the role of saliva not just as a transmitting agent of COVID 19, but also comprehend its role in the diagnosis, and as a biomarker. A systematic literature search was performed in the PubMed database and eligible studies were included if they addressed the key issues i.e saliva as a diagnostic aid. As of January 10, 2021, a total of 309 articles across the PubMed database were identified of which 28 studies met the inclusion criteria. They were carefully examined for the type of study, sample size, parameters used, sample collection technique, and conclusions drawn. Diagnostic properties of saliva, the role of ACE 2 receptors, antibody formation ability, and antiviral characteristics were also explored. Comparisons among methods of sample collection like nasopharyngeal swabs and oropharyngeal swabs to saliva were also investigated. The observations and important deductions among the different studies were compared. Results indicated that saliva could be a reliable and financially viable option in both testing viral titers as well as marking for bio analytes due to its propitious specificity and sensitivity results reported in most of the studies. However, the inferences drawn from many of these studies should be interpreted with caution due to small sample sizes, inadequate detailing on the sample handling, laboratory processing, and rush in Corona-related publication. Scientific research with larger sample sizes, in diverse populations and age groups, at different phases of disease progression of COVID-19 are essential to reach any conclusion regarding its multi-facet use in the future.
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.