ArticleBeni-Suef University journal of basic and applied sciences2023
Comparable detection of nasopharyngeal swabs and induced sputum specimens for viral nucleic acid detection of suspected novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) patients in Fayoum governorate, Egypt.
Article in Beni-Suef University journal of basic and applied sciences, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Review of COVID-19: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Advancement in Diagnostic and Detection Techniques, and Post-Pandemic Treatment Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The most commonly utilized samples for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection using real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) are nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and oropharyngeal swabs. However, there are some drawbacks. For SARS-CoV-2 detection, induced sputum might be analyzed and may be equivalent to pharyngeal swabs. This study was done to assess the potential superiority of induced sputum over NPS for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Sixty symptomatic COVID-19 patients who attended Fayoum University Hospitals in Fayoum Governorate, Egypt, were included in this cross-sectional descriptive study. Paired NPS and induced sputum samples were collected from each subject on the third and tenth days after symptoms began for RT-qPCR SARS-COV2 diagnosis. Results: At day 3, 52 (86.7%) of NPS and 48 (80.00%) of induced sputum specimens had positive RT-qPCR results with a significant statistical difference ( Conclusion: In the early stages of the disease, induced sputum and NPS tests had comparable results, but NPS yielded more false negative results later in the disease course than an induced sputum sample, which yielded higher sample positivity and viral load than NPS. Furthermore, induced sputum collection is a straightforward, non-invasive, and risk-free method. As a result, induced sputum could be useful for COVID-19 confirmation in patients with radiologically or epidemiologically suspected COVID-19 who have a negative NPS or in difficult-to-diagnose COVID-19 patients.
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.