ArticleScientific reports2026
Site-specific wastewater-based surveillance in early detection of COVID-19 new cases and prediction of mass testing outcomes in long-term care facilities.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) were disproportionately impacted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Site-specific wastewater-based surveillance (WBS) offers a non-invasive alternative to traditional mass testing by capturing collective viral loads in wastewater. This study assessed the effectiveness of WBS in detecting new COVID-19 cases in nine Edmonton LTCFs from January 2021 to May 2023. We used constrained distributed lag models to identify critical windows when wastewater viral loads were significantly associated with new cases. Using this critical window, we evaluated the predictive accuracy of wastewater samples for mass testing outcomes. Fisher’s exact test and Mann-Whitney U test compared WBS accuracy for predicting resident vs. staff cases and examined whether factors like sample type, quantity, outbreak duration, or collection timing influenced accuracy. Among 2,515 wastewater samples, 909 were positive, alongside 825 COVID-19 cases identified from 18,226 clinical specimens. Before the clinical testing scale-down in 2022, eight of nine facilities had critical windows within three days. Wastewater collected three days in advance predicted 85% of negative and 60% of positive mass testing outcomes. WBS more accurately predicted resident cases than staff cases (74% vs. 33%, p=0.02). Other factors did not significantly affect prediction accuracy. Findings support using site-specific WBS to enable timely outbreak responses and better testing allocation among vulnerable populations.
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.