ArticlePloS one2026
Diagnostic agreement between Rhinoswabs and joint nose and throat swabs for the detection of influenza and SARS-CoV-2 among symptomatic ambulatory patients in Hong Kong.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate detection of respiratory viruses relies on appropriate sample collection, but whether joint nose and throat sampling is necessary for high diagnostic performance or whether nose sampling alone can provide comparable results remains uncertain.
objectivesWe evaluated the diagnostic agreement between joint nose and throat swabs (NTS) and Rhinoswab (RhinoMed, Cremorne, Australia), a novel anterior nasal swab for RT-qPCR detection of respiratory viruses among symptomatic outpatients. STUDY
designOutpatients with febrile acute respiratory illness were enrolled at a clinic in Hong Kong and paired joint NTS and Rhinoswab samples were tested by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) for influenza A, influenza B, SARS-CoV-2 and human ribonuclease P (RNase P) as an internal control. Diagnostic agreement and RT-qPCR Ct values were compared between the paired samples.
resultsBetween May 2023 and April 2024, 488 participants provided paired samples. Overall concordance between Rhinoswab and NTS was 98.0% (95% CI: 96.3% to 99.0%) for influenza A, 99.0% (95% CI: 97.6% to 99.7%) for influenza B, and 99.0% (95% CI: 97.6% to 99.7%) for SARS-CoV-2. Cohen's kappa also indicated high agreement for all viruses: 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.98) for influenza A, 0.94 (95% CI: 0.88 to 0.99) for influenza B, and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.99) for SARS-CoV-2. Ct values from Rhinoswab were moderately correlated with NTS for all three viruses and RNase P. The majority of discordant samples had Ct values of 30 and above (16/18, 88.9%).
conclusionsRhinoswabs achieved high agreement with joint NTS for RT-qPCR detection of influenza and SARS-CoV-2. Given their minimal invasiveness Rhinoswabs are a viable alternative specimen type for supervised respiratory virus testing.
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.