Evaluation of Panbio rapid antigen test for SARS‐CoV‐2 in symptomatic patients and their contacts: a multicenter study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.24.21257020: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: The protocol was revised and approved by a single Institutional Review Board designated by the NIH authority for this study.
Consent: Inclusion criteria: Patients ≥18 years of age, who presented at the emergency services or screening sites of the participating hospitals, with respiratory symptoms consistent with COVID-19 or influenza syndrome, and who provided written informed consent to participate in the study, were included, regardless of hospitalization status.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding Laboratory personnel were blinded to results for the rapid tests. Power Analysis A sample number of 600 subjects, with at least 300 symptomatic … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.24.21257020: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics IRB: The protocol was revised and approved by a single Institutional Review Board designated by the NIH authority for this study.
Consent: Inclusion criteria: Patients ≥18 years of age, who presented at the emergency services or screening sites of the participating hospitals, with respiratory symptoms consistent with COVID-19 or influenza syndrome, and who provided written informed consent to participate in the study, were included, regardless of hospitalization status.Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding Laboratory personnel were blinded to results for the rapid tests. Power Analysis A sample number of 600 subjects, with at least 300 symptomatic patients, and 300 contacts was considered in the protocol (13, 14), allowing for a study power of 0.8 even with a prevalence of positivity for the test of 0.2, and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.8. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Test: The Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device (nasopharyngeal) (Abbott Diagnostics Korea, Inc. Ref. 41FK10) was evaluated. Abbottsuggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)Clinical information was retrieved using a REDCap database (REDCap 10.31-2021), including the WHO COVID-19 severity classification (12), the use of respiratory support (oxygen by nasal prongs or high flow), mechanical ventilation, and the presence and duration of respiratory symptoms. REDCapsuggested: (REDCap, RRID:SCR_003445)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:
Identifier Status Title NCT04894760 Recruiting Evaluation of a COVID-19 Rapid Diagnostic Test in ER Departm… Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
