ArticleViruses2023
Sensibility and Specificity of the VitaPCR™ SARS-CoV-2 Assay for the Rapid Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Older Adults in the Emergency Department.
Article in Viruses, 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
20 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid and reliable diagnostic tools are needed for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in urgent cases at admission to the hospital. We aimed to assess the performances of the rapid molecular VitaPCR™ test (Menarini Diagnostics) in a sample of older adults admitted to the Emergency Department of two Italian hospitals (2) Methods: The comparison between the rapid VitaPCR™ and the RT-PCR was performed in 1695 samples. Two naso-pharyngeal swab samplings from each individual were obtained and processed using the VitaPCR™ and the RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 (3) Results: VitaPCR™ exhibited good precision (<3% CV) and an almost perfect overall agreement (Cohen’s K = 0.90) with the RT-PCR. The limit of detection of the VitaPCR™ was 4.1 copies/µL. Compared to the RT-PCR, the sensitivity, the specificity, and the positive and negative predictive values of VitaPCR™ were 83.4%, 99.9%, 99.2% and 98.3%, respectively (4) Conclusions: The VitaPCR™ showed similar sensitivity and specificity to other molecular-based rapid tests. This study suggests that the VitaPCR™ can allow the rapid management of patients within the Emergency Department. Nevertheless, it is advisable to obtain a negative result by a RT-PCR assay before admitting a patient to a regular ward.
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.