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.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1111/birt.12520

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/birt.12520
suck pdf from google scholar
33263210!7753601!33263210
unlimited free pdf from europmc33263210    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi

pmid33263210      Birth 2021 ; 48 (1): 96-103
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Questionnaire-based vs universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 in women admitted for delivery #MMPMID33263210
  • Mei-Dan E; Satkunaratnam A; Cahan T; Leung M; Katz K; Aviram A
  • Birth 2021[Mar]; 48 (1): 96-103 PMID33263210show ga
  • BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that women admitted for delivery should have universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. Yet, the considerable difference in the incidence of COVID-19 between different geographic regions may affect screening strategies. Therefore, we aimed to compare questionnaire-based testing versus universal PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 in women admitted for delivery. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of women admitted for delivery at a single center during a four-week period (April 22-May 25, 2020). All women completed a questionnaire about COVID-19 signs, symptoms, or risk factors, and a nasopharyngeal swab for PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Women who were flagged as suspected COVID-19 by the questionnaire (questionnaire-positive) were compared with women who were not flagged by the questionnaire (questionnaire-negative). RESULTS: Overall, 446 women were eligible for analysis, of which 54 (12.1%) were questionnaire-positive. PCR swab detected SARS-CoV-2 in four (0.9%) women: 3 of 392 (0.8%) in the questionnaire-negative group, and 1 of 54 (1.9%) in the questionnaire-positive group (P = .43), yielding a number needed to screen of 92 (95% CI 62-177). In 96% of the cases, the PCR results were obtained only in the postpartum period. No positive PCR results were obtained from neonatal testing for SARS-CoV-2. The sensitivity of the questionnaire was 75.0%, and the negative predictive value was 99.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the rate of positive PCR results was not significantly different between the groups, the number needed to screen is considerably high. The use of questionnaire-based PCR testing in areas with low incidence of COVID-19 allows for a reasonable allocation of resources and is easy to implement.
  • |Adult[MESH]
  • |Asymptomatic Infections/epidemiology[MESH]
  • |COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/*statistics & numerical data[MESH]
  • |COVID-19/*diagnosis/epidemiology/physiopathology[MESH]
  • |Carrier State/*diagnosis/epidemiology[MESH]
  • |Delivery, Obstetric[MESH]
  • |Female[MESH]
  • |Humans[MESH]
  • |Labor, Obstetric[MESH]
  • |Mass Screening/*methods[MESH]
  • |Nasopharynx/virology[MESH]
  • |Ontario/epidemiology[MESH]
  • |Polymerase Chain Reaction[MESH]
  • |Predictive Value of Tests[MESH]
  • |Pregnancy[MESH]
  • |Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/*diagnosis/epidemiology/physiopathology[MESH]
  • |Prospective Studies[MESH]
  • |SARS-CoV-2[MESH]


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box