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.ijid.2021.04.066 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.04.066 33901651!8064816!33901651     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Int+J+Infect+Dis 2021 ; 107 (ä): 179-181 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33901651|t=2021. Performance evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel |pdf=|usr=}}{{33901651}} gab.com Text Performance evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel JO: Int J Infect Dis http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33901651 #FOAvip OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel (QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2), which is a closed, fully automated, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay that detects severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and 21 other pathogens that cause respiratory disease. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs from patients with or suspected of having coronavirus disease 2019 were collected and tested at Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris, France. Using the World Health Organisation-approved real-time-PCR assay developed by the Charite Institute of Virology as the reference, positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 189 negative and 88 positive samples were analyzed. QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 had an NPA of 90.48% (95% confidence interval (CI), 85.37%, 94.26%) and a PPA of 94.32% (95% CI, 87.24%, 98.13%). Co-infections were detected by QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 in 4/277 specimens. The methods exhibited comparable failure rates (23/307 [7.5%] vs. 6/298 [2.0%] for QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 and reference methods, respectively). The turnaround time was shorter for QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 compared with the reference method (difference in mean -14:30 h [standard error, 0:03:23; 95% CI, -14:37, -14:24]; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 shows good agreement with the reference assay, providing faster and accurate results for detecting SARS-CoV-2. Twit Text FOAVip Performance evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel ????Int J Infect Dis http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33901651 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33901651 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33901651}}</ref> Performance evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel #MMPMID33901651 Lebourgeois S; Storto A; Gout B; Le Hingrat Q; Ardila Tjader G; Cerdan MDC; English A; Pareja J; Love J; Houhou-Fidouh N; Manissero D; Descamps D; Visseaux B Int J Infect Dis 2021[Jun]; 107 (ä): 179-181 PMID33901651show ga OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel (QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2), which is a closed, fully automated, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay that detects severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and 21 other pathogens that cause respiratory disease. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs from patients with or suspected of having coronavirus disease 2019 were collected and tested at Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris, France. Using the World Health Organisation-approved real-time-PCR assay developed by the Charite Institute of Virology as the reference, positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 189 negative and 88 positive samples were analyzed. QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 had an NPA of 90.48% (95% confidence interval (CI), 85.37%, 94.26%) and a PPA of 94.32% (95% CI, 87.24%, 98.13%). Co-infections were detected by QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 in 4/277 specimens. The methods exhibited comparable failure rates (23/307 [7.5%] vs. 6/298 [2.0%] for QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 and reference methods, respectively). The turnaround time was shorter for QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 compared with the reference method (difference in mean -14:30 h [standard error, 0:03:23; 95% CI, -14:37, -14:24]; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 shows good agreement with the reference assay, providing faster and accurate results for detecting SARS-CoV-2. |Adolescent[MESH] |Adult[MESH] |Aged[MESH] |Aged, 80 and over[MESH] |COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/*methods[MESH] |COVID-19/*diagnosis[MESH] |Child[MESH] |Child, Preschool[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Infant[MESH] |Male[MESH] |Middle Aged[MESH] |Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/*methods[MESH] |Nasopharynx/virology[MESH] |Retrospective Studies[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2/*genetics[MESH]Performance evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx(R) Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Pan(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing