ArticlePloS one2024
Estimating infection prevalence using the positive predictive value of self-administered rapid antigen diagnostic tests: An exploration of SARS-CoV-2 surveillance data in the Netherlands from May 2021 to April 2022.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Population health and implementation outcomes of self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 using antigen detecting diagnostics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Combinatorial (bio-geo-temporal) and non-combinatorial analysis of the COVID-19 dissemination that affected Georgia (the country) in 2021.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measuring the severity of the disease of SARS-CoV-2 is complicated by the lack of valid estimations for the prevalence of infection. Self-administered rapid antigen diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) were available in the Netherlands since March 2021, requiring confirmation by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for positive results. We explored the possibility of utilizing the positive predictive value (PPV) of Ag-RDTs to estimate SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. We used data from all Public Health service testing facilities between 3 May 2021 and 10 April 2022. The PPV was calculated by dividing the number of positive RT-PCR results by the total number of confirmation tests performed, and used to estimate the prevalence and compared with the number of COVID-19 hospital admissions. In total 3,599,894 cases were included. The overall PPV was 91.8% and 88.8% were symptomatic. During our study period, the estimated prevalence ranged between 2-22% in symptomatic individuals and 2-14% in asymptomatic individuals, with a correlation between the estimated prevalence and hospital admissions two weeks later (r = 0.68 (p<0.01) and r = 0.60 (p<0.01) for symptomatic/asymptomatic individuals). The PPV of Ag-RDTs can help estimate changes in SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, especially when used in conjunction with other surveillance systems. However, the used method probably overestimated the true prevalence because of unmonitored differences in test propensity between individuals.
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.