ArticleeLife2026
Stratification of viral shedding patterns in saliva of COVID-19 patients.
Article in eLife, 2026. 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.
- Article
- Modeling viral shedding and symptom outcomes in oseltamivir-treated experimental influenza infection.PloS one · 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Living with COVID-19 requires continued vigilance against the spread and emergence of variants of concern (VOCs). Rapid and accurate saliva diagnostic testing, alongside basic public health responses, is a viable option contributing to effective transmission control. Nevertheless, our knowledge regarding the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in saliva is not as advanced as our understanding of the respiratory tract. Here, we analyzed longitudinal viral load data of SARS-CoV-2 in saliva samples from 144 patients with mild COVID-19 (a combination of our collected data and published data). Using a mathematical model, we quantified individual-level viral dynamics and stratified them into three groups using a clustering approach. Notably, the three groups exhibited distinct differences in viral RNA detection durations: 11.5 days (95% CI: 10.6-12.4), 17.4 days (16.6-18.2), and 30.0 days (28.1-31.8), respectively. Surprisingly, this stratified grouping remained unexplained despite our analysis of 47 types of clinical data, including basic demographic information, clinical symptoms, results of blood tests, and vital signs. Additionally, we quantified the expression levels of 92 micro-RNAs in a subset of saliva samples, but these also failed to explain the observed stratification, although the mir-1846 level may have been weakly correlated with peak viral load. Our study provides insights into SARS-CoV-2 infection dynamics in saliva, highlighting the challenges in predicting the duration of viral RNA detection without indicators that directly reflect an individual's immune response, such as antibody induction. Given the significant individual heterogeneity in the kinetics of saliva viral shedding, identifying biomarker(s) for viral shedding patterns will be crucial for improving public health interventions in the era of living with COVID-19.
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.