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.

10.1080/23744235.2021.1914857 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1080/23744235.2021.1914857 33985403!8127166!33985403     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       Infect+Dis+(Lond) 2021 ; 53 (9): 661-668 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33985403|t=2021. Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know? A test accuracy study |pdf=|usr=}}{{33985403}} gab.com Text Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know A test accuracy study JO: Infect Dis (Lond) http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33985403 #FOAvip BACKGROUND: Antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 is considered to be less sensitive than the standard reference method - real-time PCR (RT-PCR). It has been suggested that many patients with positive RT-PCR 'missed' by antigen testing might be non-infectious. METHODS: In a real-world high-throughput setting for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients, 494 patients were tested using RT-PCR as well as a single lateral flow antigen test (Ecotest, AssureTech, China). Where the results differed, virus viability was evaluated by cell culture. The test parameters were calculated with RT-PCR and RT-PCR adjusted on viability as reference standards. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of the used antigen test related to the RT-PCR only was 76.2%, specificity was 97.3%. However, 36 out of 39 patients 'missed' by the antigen test contained no viable virus. After adjusting on that, the sensitivity grew to 97.7% and, more importantly for disease control purposes, the negative predictive value reached 99.2%. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that viability testing should be always performed when evaluating a new antigen test. A well-chosen and validated antigen test provides excellent results in identifying patients who are shedding viable virus (although some caveats still remain) in the real-world high-throughput setting of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic individuals. Twit Text FOAVip Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know A test accuracy study ????Infect Dis (Lond) http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33985403 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33985403 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33985403}}</ref> Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know? A test accuracy study #MMPMID33985403 Homza M; Zelena H; Janosek J; Tomaskova H; Jezo E; Kloudova A; Mrazek J; Svagera Z; Prymula R Infect Dis (Lond) 2021[Sep]; 53 (9): 661-668 PMID33985403show ga BACKGROUND: Antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 is considered to be less sensitive than the standard reference method - real-time PCR (RT-PCR). It has been suggested that many patients with positive RT-PCR 'missed' by antigen testing might be non-infectious. METHODS: In a real-world high-throughput setting for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients, 494 patients were tested using RT-PCR as well as a single lateral flow antigen test (Ecotest, AssureTech, China). Where the results differed, virus viability was evaluated by cell culture. The test parameters were calculated with RT-PCR and RT-PCR adjusted on viability as reference standards. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of the used antigen test related to the RT-PCR only was 76.2%, specificity was 97.3%. However, 36 out of 39 patients 'missed' by the antigen test contained no viable virus. After adjusting on that, the sensitivity grew to 97.7% and, more importantly for disease control purposes, the negative predictive value reached 99.2%. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that viability testing should be always performed when evaluating a new antigen test. A well-chosen and validated antigen test provides excellent results in identifying patients who are shedding viable virus (although some caveats still remain) in the real-world high-throughput setting of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic individuals. |*COVID-19[MESH] |Antigens, Viral[MESH] |China[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2[MESH]Covid-19 antigen testing: better than we know? A test accuracy study (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing