ArticleVirology journal2024
Use of strips of rapid diagnostic tests as a source of ribonucleic acid for genomic surveillance of viruses: an example of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Virology journal, 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.
- Strengthening microbial genomics capacity in Africa for epidemic preparedness: key lessons from the AFROSCREEN programme.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Genomic and epidemiological analysis of SARS-CoV-2 variants isolated in Guinea: a routine sequencing implementation.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to demonstrate that the genomic material of SARS-CoV-2 can be isolated from strips of COVID-19 rapid diagnostic test cassettes.
methodIt was a prospective cross-sectional study involving patients admitted to treatment centers and sampling sites in the city of Conakry, Guinea. A total of 121 patients were double sampled, and 9 more patients were tested only for RDT. PCR was conducted according to the protocol of the RunMei kit. Sequencing was performed by using the illumina COVIDSeq protocol. Nine COVID-19 RDTs without nasopharyngeal swabs were in addition tested.
resultAmong the 130 COVID-19 RDTs, forty-seven were macroscopically positive, whereas seventy-two were positive according to PCR using RDT strip, while among the 121 VTM swabs, sixty-four were positive. Among eighty-three negative COVID-19 RDTs, twenty-seven were positive by PCR using RDT strip with a geometric mean Ct value of 32.49 cycles. Compared to those of PCR using VTM, the sensitivity and specificity of PCR using RDT strip were estimated to be 100% and 85.96%, respectively, with 93.39% test accuracy. Among the fifteen COVID-19 RDT extracts eligible for sequencing, eleven had sequences identical to those obtained via the standard method, with coverage between 75 and 99.6%.
conclusionThese results show that COVID-19 RDTs can be used as biological material for the genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2.
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.