ArticleVirusdisease2024
Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in different types of clinical specimens among suspected COVID-19 patients in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Article in Virusdisease, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs) are superior to saliva specimens, saliva can be used as an alternative specimen for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing. Moreover, studies have reported contradicting findings on whether SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in urine or not. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of NPSs, saliva and urine specimens in suspected COVID-19 patients. We conducted a cross-sectional study among a total of 604 specimens collected from 219 individuals suspected for COVID-19 from February to July 2022. We recruited participants from two COVID-19 isolation and treatment centers in Addis Ababa. We analyzed the specimens by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with a Cobas 8800 automated system. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 in NPS, saliva, and urine samples was measured by cycle threshold (Ct) values. Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percent, and mean with standard deviation were used to summarize participants characteristics. We conducted chi-square test to compare RT‒PCR results of NPS, saliva and urine specimens. All data was analyzed by SPSS version 27, and the level of significance was set at a Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13337-024-00892-9.
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.