ArticleJournal of medical virology2025
Diagnostic Performance of a Combined Rapid Antigen Test for Detecting SARS-CoV-2, Influenza Virus, and Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Symptomatic Patients in Tertiary Care.
Article in Journal of medical virology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rapid antigen diagnostic tests (RDTs) can rapidly detect respiratory pathogens, allowing for the prompt initiation of infection control measures and the prevention of nosocomial spread within hospital settings. In this study, we prospectively evaluated the diagnostic performance of a combined RDT from AllTest Biotech for the simultaneous detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza virus (IV-A/B), and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). We compared its diagnostic performance to the Xpert-Xpress-SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV molecular test using 100 naso-oropharyngeal swabs (Ct-values ≤ 35), collected from symptomatic patients with acute respiratory tract infections (RTIs) at our tertiary care hospital. The RDT showed a sensitivity of 60% (95%CI: 43.4%-74.7%) for SARS-CoV-2, with lower sensitivities for RSV at 60.0% (95%CI: 38.9%-78.2%) and IV-A/B at 54.3% (95%CI: 36.9%-70.8%). Higher sensitivities of 100% were achieved for all three viruses in respiratory samples with higher viral loads (Ct-values ≤ 25). The RDT demonstrated high specificity of > 99% for SARS-CoV-2, IV-A/B, and RSV. In conclusion, the Alltest-SARS-CoV-2/IV-A + B/RSV RDT is effective for detecting SARS-CoV-2, IV-A/B, and RSV in samples with high viral loads, but its sensitivity significantly declines at Ct-values above 25. Therefore, negative RDT results should be confirmed with nucleic acid testing in symptomatic patients with RTIs to prevent severe consequences for clinical management.
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.