ArticlePloS one2023
Performance evaluation of Biofire Film Array Respiratory Panel 2.1 for SARS-CoV-2 detection in a pediatric hospital setting.
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 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-pandemic resurgence and co-detectiondynamics of respiratory pathogens revealed by syndromic multiplex PCR.BMC microbiology · 2026Observational
- Clinical Impact of Molecular Testing for Respiratory Viruses in Children Admitted with Acute Respiratory Diseases: Real-World Evidence.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Epidemiology, co-infection, and seasonal patterns of respiratory tract infections in a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia between 2021 and 2022.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Inconsistencies in the Indian Guidelines for the Prescription of Antibiotics for Critically Ill Patients.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The highly contagious nature of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), requires rapid diagnostic tests to prevent the virus from spreading within hospitals and communities. Reverse transcription followed by the polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test is the gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infections but is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and restricted to centralized laboratories. There is a growing need to develop and implement point-of-care and rapid tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection to address these limitations. We aimed to evaluate the performance of BioFire Film Array Respiratory Panel 2.1 (BioFire FA-RP2.1) for SARS-CoV-2 detection in a pediatric hospital setting. The BioFire FA-RP2.1 test provides rapid results and can identify several viral and bacterial infections in a single test. This prospective, cross-sectional, diagnostic accuracy study enrolled participants ranging from 0 to 18 years of age, seeking medical consultation for any reason, who had been in contact with individuals confirmed to have COVID-19 or managed at the hospital for medical or surgical reasons. We employed a systematic sampling technique to ensure a representative sample. The study included 339 participants with a median age of 5 years. The BioFire FA-RP2.1 test detected SARS-CoV-2 in 18.6% of cases, while the reference RT-PCR test in 14% of cases. The BioFire FA-RP2.1 sensitivity and specificity for SARS CoV-2 detection were 98% and 94%, respectively. The positive probability coefficient (LR+) was 18. The agreement between the two tests was 0.80. In addition, the BioFire FA-RP2.1 test detected coinfection with two viruses in 7,6% of cases. The BioFire FA-RP2.1 is a reliable solution to meet pediatric healthcare needs and improve prognosis in the post-pandemic era thanks to its friendly interface and rapid testing process.
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.