ArticleHeliyon2023
SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic point-of-care testing based on loop-mediated isothermal amplification: A prospective, single-center validation study.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Rapid and accurate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diagnostic tests are crucial for controlling the spread of infections in emergency settings. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of a point-of-care (POC) test based on loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) that produces rapid results within 30 min. Methods: We prospectively included adult patients (age >19 years) who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection within the last 3 days and symptomatic patients who had visited the emergency room. Posterior nasopharyngeal (PNP) swabs and throat swabs collected by physicians were used to test the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and Cohen's Kappa coefficient (k) of the POC index and reference reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) test devices. Results: Of the 352 participants, 102 (29.0%) tested positive via the RT-PCR-based reference test device; the RT-LAMP-based POC test had a sensitivity of 70.6% and specificity of 98.0%, with 93.5% PPV, 89.1% NPV, 35.5% PLR, and 3.4% NLR. Cohen's k correlation of results from the two devices was 0.74. The cycle threshold value between the positive and negative POC test results differed (17.6 vs. 24.6, Conclusions: The RT-LAMP POC test in the emergency medical setting has a fair predictive value in high viral load cases in terms of infectivity.
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.