SynthesisScientific reports2023
Comparing SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19 self-testing/self-sampling with molecular and professional-use tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of breath analysis in detection of COVID-19 through Volatile organic compounds.Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical accuracy of instrument-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen diagnostic tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Virology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive SARS-CoV-2 screening tests: a national prospective analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Trial
- Predictive triage for testing may improve control of a COVID-19 epidemic while reducing testing requirements.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Evaluation of self-collection of nasal swab specimens for COVID-19 diagnostic testing in children in the United States, 2020-2023.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Population health and implementation outcomes of self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 using antigen detecting diagnostics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Feasibility of self-testing for acute malaria using rapid diagnostic tests in three peri-urban sub-Saharan African community settings.Malaria journal · 2025Article
- Dutch participatory surveillance framework for evaluating evolutionary changes on SARS-CoV-2 affecting rapid diagnostic test sensitivity in 2022 - 2023.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of self-testing for COVID-19 in Ethiopia: a mixed-methods study.IJTLD open · 2025Article
- A multicenter study to assess the performance of the point-of-care RT-PCR Cobas SARS-CoV-2 & Influenza A/B nucleic acid test for use on the Cobas Liat system in comparison with centralized assays across healthcare facilities in the United States.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- A policy roadmap for sustainable mass-testing.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- Rapid and highly sensitive immunoassay using an ultra-thin immuno-wall microfluidic device with a sequential fluorescence signal increment method.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of RT-PCR and a Colloidal Gold Immunochromatographic Assay for SARS-CoV-2 Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Review of COVID-19: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Advancement in Diagnostic and Detection Techniques, and Post-Pandemic Treatment Strategies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 infection biomarkers in a household transmission study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Implementation pilot study of community self-testing for COVID-19 among employees of manufacturing industries and their household members in 2022 to 2023.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Adaptive strategies for the deployment of rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling study.Gates open research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Self-testing is an effective tool to bridge the testing gap for several infectious diseases; however, its performance in detecting SARS-CoV-2 using antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) has not been systematically reviewed. This study aimed to inform WHO guidelines by evaluating the accuracy of COVID-19 self-testing and self-sampling coupled with professional Ag-RDT conduct and interpretation. Articles on this topic were searched until November 7th, 2022. Concordance between self-testing/self-sampling and fully professional-use Ag-RDTs was assessed using Cohen's kappa. Bivariate meta-analysis yielded pooled performance estimates. Quality and certainty of evidence were evaluated using QUADAS-2 and GRADE tools. Among 43 studies included, twelve reported on self-testing, and 31 assessed self-sampling only. Around 49.6% showed low risk of bias. Overall concordance with professional-use Ag-RDTs was high (kappa 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88-0.94]). Comparing self-testing/self-sampling to molecular testing, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 70.5% (95% CI 64.3-76.0) and 99.4% (95% CI 99.1-99.6), respectively. Higher sensitivity (i.e., 93.6% [95% CI 90.4-96.8] for Ct < 25) was estimated in subgroups with higher viral loads using Ct values as a proxy. Despite high heterogeneity among studies, COVID-19 self-testing/self-sampling exhibits high concordance with professional-use Ag-RDTs. This suggests that self-testing/self-sampling can be offered as part of COVID-19 testing strategies.Trial registration: PROSPERO: CRD42021250706.
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.