ArticleJournal of clinical virology plus2023
Clinical assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infectivity by rapid antigen test compared with virus isolation.
Article in Journal of clinical virology plus, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of RT-PCR and a Colloidal Gold Immunochromatographic Assay for SARS-CoV-2 Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (real-time RT-PCR) remains as a golden standard for detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, it can not be easily expanded to large-scaled screening during outbreaks, and the positive results do not necessarily correlate with infectious status of the identified subjects. In this study, the performance of Vstrip® RV2 COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test (RAT) and its correlation with virus infectivity was examined by virus culture using 163 sequential respiratory specimens collected from 26 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. When the presence of cytopathic effects (CPE) in cell culture was used as a reference method for virus infectivity, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of Vstrip® RV2 COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Test was 96.43%, 89.63%, and 90.8%, respectively. The highest Ct value was 27.7 for RdRp gene and 25.79 for E gene within CPE-positive samples, and the highest Ct value was 31.9 for RdRp gene and 29.1 for E gene within RAT positive samples. When the Ct values of specimens were below 25, the CPE and RAT results had high degree of consistency. We concluded that the RAT could be a great alternative method for determining the infectious potential of individuals with high viral load.
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.