Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38012319›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

A single-center experience on long-term clinical performance of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Test, STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test.

Seo Wan Kim, Yongjung Park, Dokyun Kim, Seok Hoon Jeong

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Seo Wan KimDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06273, South Korea.
Yongjung ParkDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06273, South Korea.
Dokyun KimDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06273, South Korea. kyunsky@yuhs.ac.
Seok Hoon JeongDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 211 Eonju-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06273, South Korea.
Gangnam Severance Hospital · KRYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic in Korea has dynamically changed with the occurrence of more easily transmissible variants. A rapid and reliable diagnostic tool for detection of SARS-CoV-2 is needed. While RT-PCR is currently the gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2, the procedure is time-consuming and requires expert technicians. The rapid antigen detection test (RADT) was approved as a confirmatory test on 14 March 2022 due to rapid dissemination of the Omicron variant. The benefits of the RADT are speed, simplicity, and point-of-care feasibility. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical performance of RADT compared to RT-PCR in a single center over 15 months, fully covering the SARS-CoV-2 'Variants of Concern (VOC).' A total of 14,194 cases was simultaneously tested by RT-PCR and RADT from January 2021 to March 2022 in Gangnam Severance Hospital and were retrospectively reviewed. PowerChek SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A&B Multiplex Real-time PCR Kit, and STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test were used. Positive rates, sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) were estimated for five periods (3 months/period). Receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was performed, and Spearman's rank test assessed the correlation between RT-PCR Ct values and semi-quantitative RADT results. The overall positive rate of RT-PCR was 4.64%. The overall sensitivity and specificity were 0.577 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.539-0.614] and 0.991 [95% CI 0.989-0.993], respectively. ROC analysis resulted in an area under the curve of 0.786 (P < 0.0001, Yuden's index = 0.568). The PCR positive rates were estimated as 0.11%, 0.71%, 4.51%, 2.02%, and 13.72%, and PPV was estimated as 0.045, 0.421, 0.951, 0.720, and 0.798 in Periods 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. A significant and moderate negative correlation between PCR Ct values and semi-quantitative RADT results was observed (Spearman's ρ = - 0.646, P < 0.0001). The RADT exhibited good performance in specimens with low Ct values (Ct ≤ 25.00) by RT-PCR. The PPV was significantly higher in Periods 3 and 5, which corresponds to rapid dissemination of the Delta and Omicron variants. The high PPV implies that individuals with a positive RADT result are very likely infected with SARS-CoV-2 and would require prompt quarantine rather than additional RT-PCR testing. The sensitivity of 0.577 indicates that RADT should not replace RT-PCR. Nonetheless, given the high PPV and the ability to track infected persons through rapid results, our findings suggest that RADT could play a significant role in control strategies for further SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansPandemicsReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID38012319
PMCPMC10681986
OpenAlexW4389056670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.