ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Performance Analysis of Self-Collected Nasal and Oral Swabs for Detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual-transcriptomic analysis of human nasal transcriptome and microbiome reveals host-bacteria associations in symptomatic respiratory infection.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Evaluation of self-collection of nasal swab specimens for COVID-19 diagnostic testing in children in the United States, 2020-2023.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Comparison of self-collected oral-nasal and mid-turbinate swabs to healthcare worker-collected nasopharyngeal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: a paired clinical evaluation.Access microbiology · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Frequent Point-of-Care Molecular COVID-19 Surveillance in a Rural Workplace: Nonrandomized Controlled Clinical Trial Among Miners.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Herpesviruses and SARS-CoV-2: Viral Association with Oral Inflammatory Diseases.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Evaluation of COVID-19 antigen rapid diagnostic tests for self-testing in Lesotho and Zambia.PloS one · 2024Article
- A Proactive Testing Strategy to COVID-19 for Reopening University Campus during Omicron Wave in Korea: Ewha Safe Campus (ESC) Project.Ewha medical journal · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Four Rapid Antigen Tests for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection with Nasopharyngeal Swabs.Biomedicines · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the third highly pathogenic human coronavirus and is rapidly transmitted by infected individuals regardless of their symptoms. During the COVID-19 pandemic, owing to the dearth of skilled healthcare workers (HCWs) to collect samples for early diagnosis, self-collection emerged as a viable alternative. To evaluate the reliability of self-collection, we compared the virus detection rate using 3990 self-collected swabs and HCW-collected swabs, procured from the same individuals and collected immediately after the self-collection. The results of multiplex reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction revealed that the viral load in the HCW-collected swabs was marginally (18.4-28.8 times) higher than that in self-collected swabs. Self-collection showed no significant difference in sensitivity and specificity from HCW-collection (κ = 0.87, McNemar's test;
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.