ArticleRevista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica2024
Diagnostic performance of a point-of-care molecular system for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Peru.
Article in Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Editorial excellence and impact on public health: a strategic look from scientific journals of the global south.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study assessed the diagnostic performance of the Xpert®Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test in comparison with the Charité protocol real-time RT PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Peruvian patients. This was a diagnostic test study that included 100 nasal and pharyngeal swab samples. We obtained an overall concordance of 98.70% (95%CI: 92.98-99.97), with a kappa coefficient of 0.97 (95%CI: 0.86-1.00) and sensitivity and relative specificity rates of 100% and 96.15%, respectively. Additionally, the percentage of the area under the ROC curve was 98.08% in both cases, and an analytical specificity rate of 100% was obtained for the different respiratory viruses evaluated. In conclusion, the Xpert®Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test, by using nasal and pharyngeal swab samples, was highly sensitive and specific, and the kappa coefficient showed an excellent correlation when compared to the reference test. Motivation for the study. To describe and evaluate a closed molecular platform, easy to use and of importance in Peru for the management of diseases of public health priority, now implemented for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Main findings. Highly sensitive and specific molecular test, with excellent correlation compared to the reference test for detecting SARS-CoV-2. Implications. Can be used in point-of-care laboratories for rapid molecular detection of different infectious agents, including SARS-CoV-2. Little expertise and minimal infrastructure are required to implement it.
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.