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.

10.3389/fpubh.2020.593491 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.3389/fpubh.2020.593491 33575241!7870983!33575241     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 233.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Front+Public+Health 2020 ; 8 (ä): 593491 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33575241|t=2020. Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection With Nasopharyngeal Swabs |pdf=|usr=}}{{33575241}} gab.com Text Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection With Nasopharyngeal Swabs JO: Front Public Health http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33575241 #FOAvip Background: SARS-CoV-2-infected subjects have been proven contagious in the symptomatic, pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic phase. The identification of these patients is crucial in order to prevent virus circulation. No reliable data on the sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) are available because of the lack of a shared reference standard to identify SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. The aim of our study was to collect data on patients with a known diagnosis of COVID-19 who underwent serial testing to assess NPS sensitivity. Methods: The study was a multi-center, observational, retrospective clinical study with consecutive enrollment. We enrolled patients who met all of the following inclusion criteria: clinical recovery, documented SARS-CoV-2 infection (>/=1 positive rRT-PCR result) and >/=1 positive NPS among the first two follow-up swabs. A positive NPS not preceded by a negative nasopharyngeal swab collected 24-48 h earlier was considered a true positive. A negative NPS followed by a positive NPS collected 24-48 h later was regarded as a false negative. The primary outcome was to define sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection with NPS. Results: Three hundred and ninety three NPS were evaluated in 233 patients; the sensitivity was 77% (95% CI, 73 to 81%). Sensitivity of the first follow-up NPS (n = 233) was 79% (95% CI, 73 to 84%) with no significant variations over time. We found no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity of the first follow-up NPS according to time since symptom onset, age, sex, number of comorbidities, and onset symptoms. Conclusions: NPS utility in the diagnostic algorithm of COVID-19 should be reconsidered. Twit Text FOAVip Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection With Nasopharyngeal Swabs ????Front Public Health http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33575241 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33575241 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33575241}}</ref> Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection With Nasopharyngeal Swabs #MMPMID33575241 Clerici B; Muscatello A; Bai F; Pavanello D; Orlandi M; Marchetti GC; Castelli V; Casazza G; Costantino G; Podda GM Front Public Health 2020[]; 8 (ä): 593491 PMID33575241show ga Background: SARS-CoV-2-infected subjects have been proven contagious in the symptomatic, pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic phase. The identification of these patients is crucial in order to prevent virus circulation. No reliable data on the sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) are available because of the lack of a shared reference standard to identify SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. The aim of our study was to collect data on patients with a known diagnosis of COVID-19 who underwent serial testing to assess NPS sensitivity. Methods: The study was a multi-center, observational, retrospective clinical study with consecutive enrollment. We enrolled patients who met all of the following inclusion criteria: clinical recovery, documented SARS-CoV-2 infection (>/=1 positive rRT-PCR result) and >/=1 positive NPS among the first two follow-up swabs. A positive NPS not preceded by a negative nasopharyngeal swab collected 24-48 h earlier was considered a true positive. A negative NPS followed by a positive NPS collected 24-48 h later was regarded as a false negative. The primary outcome was to define sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection with NPS. Results: Three hundred and ninety three NPS were evaluated in 233 patients; the sensitivity was 77% (95% CI, 73 to 81%). Sensitivity of the first follow-up NPS (n = 233) was 79% (95% CI, 73 to 84%) with no significant variations over time. We found no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity of the first follow-up NPS according to time since symptom onset, age, sex, number of comorbidities, and onset symptoms. Conclusions: NPS utility in the diagnostic algorithm of COVID-19 should be reconsidered. |Adult[MESH] |Aged[MESH] |COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/instrumentation/*methods[MESH] |COVID-19/*diagnosis/virology[MESH] |Chi-Square Distribution[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Male[MESH] |Middle Aged[MESH] |Nasopharynx/*virology[MESH] |RNA, Viral/analysis[MESH] |Retrospective Studies[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2/*isolation & purification[MESH] |Sensitivity and Specificity[MESH]Sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 Detection With Nasopharyngeal Swabs (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing