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.

10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e101 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e101 33847084!8042480!33847084     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       J+Korean+Med+Sci 2021 ; 36 (14): e101 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33847084|t=2021. Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection |pdf=|usr=}}{{33847084}} gab.com Text Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection JO: J Korean Med Sci http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33847084 #FOAvip We evaluated the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. We applied both tests to patients who were about to be hospitalized, had visited an emergency room, or had been admitted due to COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. Two nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained; one was tested by RT-PCR and the other by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. A total of 118 pairs of tests from 98 patients were performed between January 5 and 11, 2021. The overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test compared to RT-PCR were 17.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8-32.0%) and 100% (95% CI, 95.3-100.0%). Analysis of the results using RT-PCR cycle thresholds of </= 30 or </= 25 increased the sensitivity to 26.9% (95% CI, 13.7-46.1%), and 41.1% (95% CI, 21.6-64.0%), respectively. Twit Text FOAVip Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection ????J Korean Med Sci http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33847084 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33847084 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33847084}}</ref> Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection #MMPMID33847084 Oh SM; Jeong H; Chang E; Choe PG; Kang CK; Park WB; Kim TS; Kwon WY; Oh MD; Kim NJ J Korean Med Sci 2021[Apr]; 36 (14): e101 PMID33847084show ga We evaluated the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. We applied both tests to patients who were about to be hospitalized, had visited an emergency room, or had been admitted due to COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. Two nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained; one was tested by RT-PCR and the other by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. A total of 118 pairs of tests from 98 patients were performed between January 5 and 11, 2021. The overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test compared to RT-PCR were 17.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8-32.0%) and 100% (95% CI, 95.3-100.0%). Analysis of the results using RT-PCR cycle thresholds of |*COVID-19 Testing[MESH] |Antigens, Viral/*immunology[MESH] |COVID-19/*diagnosis/*immunology[MESH] |Emergency Service, Hospital[MESH] |False Positive Reactions[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Nasopharynx/virology[MESH] |Predictive Value of Tests[MESH] |Probability[MESH] |Reference Standards[MESH] |Reproducibility of Results[MESH] |Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction[MESH]Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detect(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing