ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Adequacy of using a single nasal swab for rapid influenza diagnostic testing, PCR, and whole genome sequencing.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opportunities for Enhanced Public Health Surveillance via Molecular Detection and Sequencing of Diverse Respiratory Viruses From Self-collected SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test Swabs.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDT) demonstrate varying sensitivities, often necessitating reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to confirm results. The two methods generally require separate specimens. Using the same anterior nasal swab for both RIDT and molecular confirmation would reduce cost and waste and increase patient comfort. The aim of this study was to determine if RIDT residual nasal swab (rNS) specimens are adequate for RT-PCR and whole genome sequencing (WGS). We performed RT-PCR and WGS on paired rNS and nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swab specimens that were collected from primary care patients across all ages. We randomly selected 199 and 40 paired specimens for RT-PCR and WGS, respectively, from the 962 paired surveillance specimens collected during the 2014-2015 influenza season. Sensitivity and specificity for rNS specimens were 81.3% and 96.7%, respectively, as compared to NP/OP specimens. The mean cycle threshold (Ct) value for the NP/OP specimen was significantly lower when the paired specimens were both positive than when the NP/OP swab was positive and the nasal swab was negative (25.5 vs 29.5; p<0.001). Genomic information was extracted from all 40 rNS specimens and 37 of the 40 NP/OP specimens. Complete WGS reads were available for 67.5% (14 influenza A; 13 influenza B) of the rNS specimens and 59.5% (14 influenza A; 8 influenza B) of the NP/OP specimens. It is feasible to use a single anterior nasal swab for RIDT followed by RT-PCR and/or WGS. This approach may be appropriate in situations where training and supplies are limited. Additional studies are needed to determine if residual nasal swabs from other rapid diagnostic tests produce similar results.
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.