Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1016/j.jinf.2020.08.043 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.08.043 32882315!7457918!32882315     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       J+Infect 2020 ; 81 (5): 681-697 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=32882315|t=2020. The estimation of diagnostic accuracy of tests for COVID-19: A scoping review |pdf=|usr=}}{{32882315}} gab.com Text The estimation of diagnostic accuracy of tests for COVID-19: A scoping review JO: J Infect http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32882315 #FOAvip OBJECTIVES: To assess the methodologies used in the estimation of diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and other nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and to evaluate the quality and reliability of the studies employing those methods. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of English-language articles published December 31, 2019-June 19, 2020. Studies of any design that performed tests on >/=10 patients and reported or inferred correlative statistics were included. Studies were evaluated using elements of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) guidelines. RESULTS: We conducted a narrative and tabular synthesis of studies organized by their reference standard strategy or comparative agreement method, resulting in six categorizations. Critical study details were frequently unreported, including the mechanism for patient/sample selection and researcher blinding to results, which lead to concern for bias. CONCLUSIONS: Current studies estimating test performance characteristics have imperfect study design and statistical methods for the estimation of test performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 tests. The included studies employ heterogeneous methods and overall have an increased risk of bias. Employing standardized guidelines for study designs and statistical methods will improve the process for developing and validating rRT-PCR and NAAT for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Twit Text FOAVip The estimation of diagnostic accuracy of tests for COVID-19: A scoping review ????J Infect http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32882315 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32882315 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|32882315}}</ref> The estimation of diagnostic accuracy of tests for COVID-19: A scoping review #MMPMID32882315 Axell-House DB; Lavingia R; Rafferty M; Clark E; Amirian ES; Chiao EY J Infect 2020[Nov]; 81 (5): 681-697 PMID32882315show ga OBJECTIVES: To assess the methodologies used in the estimation of diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and other nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and to evaluate the quality and reliability of the studies employing those methods. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of English-language articles published December 31, 2019-June 19, 2020. Studies of any design that performed tests on >/=10 patients and reported or inferred correlative statistics were included. Studies were evaluated using elements of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) guidelines. RESULTS: We conducted a narrative and tabular synthesis of studies organized by their reference standard strategy or comparative agreement method, resulting in six categorizations. Critical study details were frequently unreported, including the mechanism for patient/sample selection and researcher blinding to results, which lead to concern for bias. CONCLUSIONS: Current studies estimating test performance characteristics have imperfect study design and statistical methods for the estimation of test performance characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 tests. The included studies employ heterogeneous methods and overall have an increased risk of bias. Employing standardized guidelines for study designs and statistical methods will improve the process for developing and validating rRT-PCR and NAAT for the diagnosis of COVID-19. |*Data Accuracy[MESH] |Adolescent[MESH] |Adult[MESH] |Aged[MESH] |Aged, 80 and over[MESH] |Betacoronavirus/*genetics[MESH] |COVID-19[MESH] |COVID-19 Testing[MESH] |COVID-19 Vaccines[MESH] |Child[MESH] |Child, Preschool[MESH] |Clinical Laboratory Techniques/*methods[MESH] |Coronavirus Infections/*diagnosis/virology[MESH] |Diagnostic Tests, Routine/*methods[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Infant[MESH] |Infant, Newborn[MESH] |Male[MESH] |Middle Aged[MESH] |Pandemics[MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/*diagnosis/virology[MESH] |Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods[MESH] |Reproducibility of Results[MESH] |Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2[MESH]The estimation of diagnostic accuracy of tests for COVID-19: A scoping(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing