Considerations for the selection of tests for SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics
Molecular Biology Reports, ISSN: 1573-4978, Vol: 49, Issue: 10, Page: 9725-9735
2022
- 6Citations
- 27Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- CrossRef1
- Captures27
- Readers27
- 27
Review Description
During the course of 2020, the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) spread rapidly across the world. Clinical diagnostic testing for SARS-Cov-2 infection has relied on the real‐time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction and is considered the gold standard assay. Commercial vendors and laboratories quickly mobilised to develop diagnostic tests to detect the novel coronavirus, which was fundamentally important in the pandemic response. These SARS-Cov-2 assays were developed in line with the Food Drug Administration-Emergency Use Authorization guidance. Although new tests are continuously being developed, information about SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic molecular test accuracy has been limited and at times controversial. Therefore, the analytical and clinical performance of SARS-CoV-2 test kits should be carefully considered by the appropriate regulatory authorities and evaluated by independent laboratory validation. This would provide improved end-user confidence in selecting the most reliable and accurate diagnostic test. Moreover, it is unclear whether some of these rapidly developed tests have been subjected to rigorous quality control and assurance required under good manufacturing practice. Variable target gene regions selected for currently available tests, potential mutation in target gene regions, non-standardized pre-analytic phase, a lack of manufacturer independent validation data all create difficulties in selecting tests appropriate for different countries and laboratories. Here we provide information on test criteria which are important in the assessment and selection of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic tests and outline the potential issues associated with a proportion of the tests on the market.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85128455219&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11033-022-07455-5; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35441938; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11033-022-07455-5; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11033-022-07455-5; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11033-022-07455-5
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know