ArticleAfrican journal of infectious diseases2024
MOLECULAR DETECTION PROTOCOL OF SARS-COV-2 THROUGH SELF-COLLECTED SALIVA SPECIMENS VERSUS NASOPHARYNGEAL SWABS.
Article in African journal of infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Several reports have shown that saliva specimen is an excellent alternative biofluid sample for SARS-CoV-2 detection. We conducted this study, in order to assess the sensitivity and specificity of using saliva self-collected by adult and pediatric patients, as a biological sample for RT-PCR diagnosis. Aims: The present study was carried out to assess the sensitivity and specificity of using saliva self-collected from adult and pediatric patients, as a biological sample for RT-qPCR diagnosis. Methods: In this study, 50 symptomatic patients and 40 asymptomatic subjects (adult and pediatric) were enrolled between September 2020 and November 2020 at the Department of Infectious Diseases, Bejaia University Hospital (CHU), and tested simultaneously for the sensitivity and specificity of the SARS-CoV-2 viral genome by RT-PCR on both nasopharyngeal swabs NP swab and saliva samples. Results: Our RT-qPCR results revealed that saliva samples showed the highest sensitivity (95% CI [27.67, 29.82]) followed by a nasopharyngeal swab for symptomatic (95% CI [29.64, 31.49]) as well as for asymptomatic adult patients. Moreover, the saliva of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients was monitored, and the presence of viral RNA was detected in >95% of the asymptomatic patients as well as the symptomatic patients. Surprisingly, the Ct values of ORF1ab and N genes are highly lower in nasopharyngeal swabs compared to saliva. Indeed, the mean difference note that for the ORF1ab gene and N gene, the mean of difference in ΔCt value were respectively 3.683 and 3.578. Together, including symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects, the overall agreement between the saliva sample and the nasopharyngeal is about 84%. Conclusion: The sensitivity of saliva samples remains acceptable; it may still be a viable option in locations where laboratory facilities are lacking for diagnostic purposes in the early phase of the disease.
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.