Comparison of BinaxNOW and SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR Detection of the Omicron Variant from Matched Anterior Nares Swabs

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

Our results suggest BinaxNOW can rule in SARS-CoV-2 infection but would miss infections if RDTs were exclusively used.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2022.01.31.22270206: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Abbott BinaxNOW™ COVID-19 Antigen Test: The additional matched AN swabs were tested according to the manufacturer instructions.
    Abbott
    suggested: (Abbott, RRID:SCR_010477)
    Full length genomes for each amplified sample were then assembled through alignment to the Wuhan-Hu-1 reference sequence (NC_045512.2) (16) using Bowtie2(17).
    Bowtie2
    suggested: (Bowtie 2, RRID:SCR_016368)
    Nucleotide substitutions, insertions, and deletions were identified with LoFreq (18) Lineage assignment for each genome was carried out using Pangolin(19).
    LoFreq
    suggested: (LoFreq, RRID:SCR_013054)
    Data Analysis: Data analysis was performed on MATLAB (MathWorks, Natick, Massachusetts)
    MATLAB
    suggested: (MATLAB, RRID:SCR_001622)

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Limitations of this study include the relatively small sample size. The disease prevalence at our clinic as measured by qRT-PCR on the two days of testing was approaching 50%, thus we are confident that the conclusions drawn from our sample size of 110 swabs are sound. It is also important to note that we asked individuals to swab each nostril twice, and the swab for the BinaxNOWTM test was always taken second. It is possible that less material was present on the swabs taken for the RDT, which could account for some of the lower sensitivity. Finally, we would like to note that four individuals tested on both days, and thus, our dataset includes 110 matched samples from 106 individuals. We do know that the 4 individuals who tested twice tested negative both times on both tests. To be sure, tests like BinaxNOW™ are still valuable tools, as they provide immediate results, require no additional instrumentation, and are effective at rule-in diagnosis. However, there is still an unmet need for more sensitive rapid diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 that could augment qRT-PCR testing at times of high-demand. Alternative approaches could include increased investment to increase the availability of qRT-PCR testing facilities.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    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.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.