Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41194062›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025

Dutch participatory surveillance framework for evaluating evolutionary changes on SARS-CoV-2 affecting rapid diagnostic test sensitivity in 2022 - 2023.

Eva Kozanli, Wanda Han, Tara Smit, Jordy de Bakker, Mansoer Elahi, Ryanne Jaarsma, Gesa Carstens, Albert Jan van Hoek, Dirk Eggink

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Eva KozanliCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Wanda HanCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Tara SmitCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Jordy de BakkerCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Mansoer ElahiCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Ryanne JaarsmaCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Gesa CarstensCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands.
Albert Jan van HoekCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands. Albert.jan.van.hoek@rivm.nl.
Dirk EgginkCentre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands. Dirk.eggink@rivm.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapid Diagnostic Tests (RDTs) for SARS-CoV-2 have been pivotal for diagnostics, and shaping policies regarding self-isolation. In case of decreased sensitivity of RDTs to novel virus variants, viral spread can increase. In order to monitor for reduced sensitivity of RDTs we used a collection of SARS-CoV-2 positive samples from RDT negative patients. Infectieradar, a national participatory surveillance that registers respiratory symptoms and investigates the causative pathogen(s), is used here as a framework to study false-negative RDT results and possible relation of the emergence of new virus variants.

methodsParticipants reported weekly on RDT use and symptoms linked to Acute Respiratory Illness (ARI). Each week, all RDT-positive samples and a subset of 200 symptomatic, participants with RDT negative samples were invited to send in nose throat swabs (NTS). SARS-CoV-2 Ct-values were determined using RT-PCR on RDT-positive and RDT-negative NTS samples and compared using unpaired T-tests. Sequencing was performed on all eligible samples to compare the proportion of mutations in the N encoding gene and investigate the clustering patterns of genome sequences through analyses. NTS samples of participants with discordant RT-PCR and RDT results were also analyzed using RDTs by professionals in the laboratory. Between October 2022 and October 2023, our study had 16,893 participants and we collected 1,757 self-test-positive/NTS PCR-positive samples (RDT+/PCR+) and 359 self-test-negative/NTS PCR positive samples (RDT-/PCR+), which is 4.3% of RDT-negative samples.

resultsWe observed overall higher Ct-values in the RDT-negative group, but saw no changes in viral loads throughout our sampling period. Few and relatively small differences in prevalence of amino acid substitutions were observed when we compared the RDT-negative group and to RDT-positive group. No specific clusters within the phylogenetic tree were observed from the RDT-negative sequences, which suggested there were no distinctive genetic properties of RDT-negative specimens. This was further confirmed by laboratory analyses.

conclusionsEvaluating RDT performance in the Dutch population and in-depth analysis of false-negative RDT specimens, led to no evidence for SARS-CoV-2 evolution affecting RDT sensitivity of the tests used. The participatory surveillance program Infectieradar is a powerful tool for our national surveillance of acute respiratory illnesses, as well as for research purposes. Since this framework offered both self-testing and the gold standard of PCR testing results.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 TestingDiagnostic Tests, RoutineSARS-CoV-2AdultAgedEvolution, MolecularFalse Negative ReactionsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMutationNetherlandsRapid Diagnostic TestsSensitivity and SpecificityControl measuresCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2Self-testsSequencingSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID41194062
PMCPMC12587668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.