Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36862684›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Head-to-head comparison of nasal and nasopharyngeal sampling using SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing in Lesotho.

Niklaus D Labhardt, Lucia González Fernández, Bulemba Katende, Josephine Muhairwe, Moniek Bresser, Alain Amstutz, Tracy R Glass, Morten Ruhwald, Jilian A Sacks, Camille Escadafal and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Causes and Seasonality of Upper Respiratory Infections in Adults in Lesotho (2021-2022) (CORIAL).The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2026
    Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Niklaus D LabhardtSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3599-1791
Lucia González FernándezSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Bulemba KatendeSolidarMed, Partnerships for Health, Maseru, Lesotho.ORCID 0000-0002-4562-0612
Josephine MuhairweSolidarMed, Partnerships for Health, Maseru, Lesotho.
Moniek BresserSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Alain AmstutzSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Tracy R GlassSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Morten RuhwaldFIND, The Global Alliance for Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jilian A SacksFIND, The Global Alliance for Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Camille EscadafalFIND, The Global Alliance for Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Mathabo MarekaNational Reference Laboratory, Ministry of Health of Lesotho, Maseru, Lesotho.
Sekhele M MookoNational Reference Laboratory, Ministry of Health of Lesotho, Maseru, Lesotho.
Margaretha de VosFIND, The Global Alliance for Diagnostics, Geneva, Switzerland.
Klaus ReitherSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the real-world diagnostic performance of nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs for SD Biosensor STANDARD Q COVID-19 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Test (Ag-RDT).

methodsIndividuals ≥5 years with COVID-19 compatible symptoms or history of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 presenting at hospitals in Lesotho received two nasopharyngeal and one nasal swab. Ag-RDT from nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs were performed as point-of-care on site, the second nasopharyngeal swab used for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as the reference standard.

resultsOut of 2198 participants enrolled, 2131 had a valid PCR result (61% female, median age 41 years, 8% children), 84.5% were symptomatic. Overall PCR positivity rate was 5.8%. The sensitivity for nasopharyngeal, nasal, and combined nasal and nasopharyngeal Ag-RDT result was 70.2% (95%CI: 61.3-78.0), 67.3% (57.3-76.3) and 74.4% (65.5-82.0), respectively. The respective specificity was 97.9% (97.1-98.4), 97.9% (97.2-98.5) and 97.5% (96.7-98.2). For both sampling modalities, sensitivity was higher in participants with symptom duration ≤ 3days versus ≤ 7days. Agreement between nasal and nasopharyngeal Ag-RDT was 99.4%.

conclusionsThe STANDARD Q Ag-RDT showed high specificity. Sensitivity was, however, below the WHO recommended minimum requirement of ≥ 80%. The high agreement between nasal and nasopharyngeal sampling suggests that for Ag-RDT nasal sampling is a good alternative to nasopharyngeal sampling.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdultChildFemaleHumansLesothoMaleNasopharynxNose

Identifiers

PMID36862684
PMCPMC9980827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.