Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37182639›Full record

ArticleClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases2023

Virus variant-specific clinical performance of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test with focus on Omicron variants of concern.

Linus Bornemann, Olaf Kaup, Johannes Kleideiter, Bertram Ruprecht, Annika Hoyer, Marcus Panning, Reinhard Bornemann, Michael Wehmeier

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Linus BornemannInstitute of Virology, University Medical Centre and Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Olaf KaupInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, Microbiology and Transfusion Medicine, Campus Bielefeld Hospital, University Hospital OWL, Bielefeld, Germany.
Johannes KleideiterDepartment of Clinical Hygiene, Campus Bielefeld Hospital, University Hospital OWL, Bielefeld, Germany.
Bertram RuprechtDepartment of Pneumology and Respiratory Medicine, Campus Bielefeld Hospital, University Hospital OWL, Bielefeld, Germany.
Annika HoyerInstitute of Biostatistics and Medical Biometry, University Medical School OWL, University Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany.
Marcus PanningInstitute of Virology, University Medical Centre and Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Reinhard BornemannInstitute of Population Medicine and Health Services, School of Public Health University Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany.
Michael WehmeierInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, Microbiology and Transfusion Medicine, Campus Bielefeld Hospital, University Hospital OWL, Bielefeld, Germany. Electronic address: michael.wehmeier@klinikumbielefeld.de.
Bielefeld University · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAntigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) play an important role in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. They are easier, quicker, and less expensive than the 'reference standard' RT-PCR and therefore widely in use. Reliable clinical data with respect to Ag-RDT performance in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants of concern (VOCs) are limited. Consequently, the objective of this study was to determine the impact different VOCs-especially Omicron-have on the clinical performance of an Ag-RDT.

methodsWe compared the clinical performance of the Sofia SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT to RT-PCR in a real-world, single-centre study in a clinical point-of-care setting in patients admitted to a large hospital via the emergency department from 2 November 2020 to 4 September 2022.

resultsAmong 38 434 Ag-RDT/RT-PCR tandems taken, 1528 yielded a SARS-CoV-2 positive RT-PCR test result, with a prevalence of 4.0% (95% CI, 3.8-4.2). Overall sensitivity of the Ag-RDT was 63.7% (95% CI, 61.3-66.1) and overall specificity was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.5-99.6). Ag-RDT sensitivity was dependent on viral load (VL), because the sensitivity increased to 93.2% (95% CI, 91.5-94.6) in samples with a VL > 10 DISCUSSION: Ag-RDT sensitivity for detection of patients with lower VLs and with Omicron-VOC is reduced, limiting the effectiveness of Ag-RDTs. However, Ag-RDTs are still an unreplaceable tool for widely available, quick, and inexpensive point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2Emergency Service, HospitalHumansImmunologic TestsMaleSensitivity and SpecificityAntigen rapid diagnostic testCOVID-19Cycle thresholdLimit of detectionOmicron variantRT-PCRSARS-CoV-2SensitivityVariants of concernViral load

Identifiers

PMID37182639
PMCPMC10181871
OpenAlexW4376272473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.