Selected article for: "confidence interval and Rt analysis"

Author: Oh, Sang-Min; Jeong, Hyeonju; Chang, Euijin; Choe, Pyoeng Gyun; Kang, Chang Kyung; Park, Wan Beom; Kim, Taek Soo; Kwon, Woon Yong; Oh, Myoung-Don; Kim, Nam Joong
Title: Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection
  • Cord-id: ywofqu3z
  • Document date: 2021_4_1
  • ID: ywofqu3z
    Snippet: We evaluated the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. We applied both tests to patients who were about to be hospitalized, had visited an emergency room, or had been admitted due to COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. Two nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained; one was tested by RT-PCR and the other by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. A total of 118 pairs of tests from 98 patients
    Document: We evaluated the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. We applied both tests to patients who were about to be hospitalized, had visited an emergency room, or had been admitted due to COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. Two nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained; one was tested by RT-PCR and the other by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. A total of 118 pairs of tests from 98 patients were performed between January 5 and 11, 2021. The overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test compared to RT-PCR were 17.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8–32.0%) and 100% (95% CI, 95.3–100.0%). Analysis of the results using RT-PCR cycle thresholds of ≤ 30 or ≤ 25 increased the sensitivity to 26.9% (95% CI, 13.7–46.1%), and 41.1% (95% CI, 21.6–64.0%), respectively.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • Try single phrases listed below for: 1