Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38613706›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2024

Diagnostic performance, stability, and acceptability of self-collected saliva without additives for SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnosis.

Catalina Marín-Echeverri, Lizet Pérez-Zapata, Laura Álvarez-Acevedo, Sebastián Gutiérrez-Hincapié, Melissa Adams-Parra, Didier Tirado-Duarte, Johan Bolívar-Muñoz, Marlon Gallego-Gómez, Yadira Galeano-Castañeda, Christian Piedrahita-Ochoa and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catalina Marín-EcheverriMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia. cmarine@sura.com.co.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4267-5677
Lizet Pérez-ZapataMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-4288-5532
Laura Álvarez-AcevedoMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-8991-9723
Sebastián Gutiérrez-HincapiéMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1576-595X
Melissa Adams-ParraMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8890-3372
Didier Tirado-DuarteMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9814-3250
Johan Bolívar-MuñozMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2781-7403
Marlon Gallego-GómezMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9615-4156
Yadira Galeano-CastañedaMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3478-4099
Christian Piedrahita-OchoaMolecular Biology Unit, Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7206-8205
Heiddy Del Valle ArrietaScientific Management Direction, SURA, Medellín, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-3756-8326
Colombian Association of Surgery · CO

Funding

Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA-Colombia Ayudas Diagnósticas SURA-Colombia
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to a global pandemic. The molecular diagnosis of this virus is mostly performed by collecting upper respiratory samples, which has many disadvantages, including patient discomfort and the need for trained healthcare professionals. Although saliva has emerged as a more comfortable sample, the use of additives to preserve viral RNA is expensive and, in some cases, difficult for self-collection.

methodThis study evaluated the diagnostic performance by RT-PCR and stability of self-collected saliva using wide-mouth specimen collection cups without stabilization and/or inactivation buffers for SARS-CoV-2 detection, compared to nasopharyngeal samples and saliva collected with additives. Additionally, the study assessed the acceptability of this sample collection method among participants and healthcare personnel.

resultsThe study included 1281 volunteers with a 24.6% positive infection rate. Saliva demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance to nasopharyngeal samples, with a sensitivity of 87.6% and specificity of 99.6%, for a total percent agreement of 96.4%. The study also showed that viral RNA in saliva remained stable for at least 72 h at different temperatures. Notably, saliva samples without additives exhibited a lower RdRp Ct compared to samples with additives, suggesting that the absence of stabilization and/or inactivation buffers does not significantly affect its performance. The study highlighted the acceptability of saliva among patients and healthcare personnel due to its noninvasive nature and ease of collection.

conclusionsThis research supports the implementation of self-collected saliva as a comfortable and user-friendly alternative sample for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

Indexed as

COVID-19RNA, ViralSalivaSARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificitySpecimen HandlingAdolescentAdultAgedCOVID-19 Nucleic Acid TestingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNasopharynxYoung AdultRNA, ViralAcceptabilityCOVID-19PerformanceSalivaSelf-collectionStability

Identifiers

PMID38613706
OpenAlexW4394786338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.