ArticleJournal of public health in Africa2026
Evaluation of the concordance between nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs in the detection of COVID-19.
Article in Journal of public health in Africa, 2026. 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
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nasopharyngeal swabs (NASO) cause discomfort for patients, which can discourage them from getting tested for COVID-19 and limit case detection. It is therefore necessary to consider an alternative, more comfortable swab. Aim: Evaluated the concordance between nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal sampling for COVID-19 diagnosis in the Cameroonian context. Setting: This study was carried out at "Chantal Biya" International Reference Centre for Research on HIV/AIDS Prevention and Management (CIRCB) in Yaoundé, Cameroon. Methods: A comparative study was conducted in April 2021 among consenting participants tested for COVID-19 at "Chantal Biya" International Reference Centre for Research on HIV/AIDS Prevention and Management (CIRCB) in Yaoundé, Cameroon. Sampling began with nasopharyngeal swabs, followed by oropharyngeal swabs, all taken by the same technician, and analysis was carried out using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests on the Abbott platform. Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad version 6.0; Results: A total of 154 participants were enrolled (59.7% male, median age 38 years, interquartile range [IQR]: 30-49). Following PCR testing, the overall COVID-19 positivity rate was 36.36% (56/154), with 34.41% ( Conclusion: Our evidence suggests a superiority effect of nasopharyngeal in detecting cases of COVID-19. However, the overall high PPV of oropharyngeal swab, and its improved performance with high viral load. Contribution: Therefore, in case of counter-indication to nasopharyngeal swabbing, oropharyngeal can be an acceptable alternative.
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.