Saliva is less sensitive than nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 detection in the community setting
Lu, J.; Becker, D.; Sandoval, E.; Amin, A.; De Hoff, P.; Diets, A.; Leonetti, N.; Lim, Y. W.; Elliott, C.; Laurent, L.; Grzymski, J.
Show abstract
The use of saliva collection for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics in the ambulatory setting provides several advantages when compared to nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS), including ease of self-collection and reduced use of personal protective equipment (PPE). In addition saliva collection could be advantageous in advising if a convalescent patient is able to return to work after a period of self-quarantine. We investigated the utility of saliva collection in the community setting at Renown Health in a prospective Diagnostic Cohort of 88 patients and in a Convalescent Cohort of 24 patients. In the Diagnostic Cohort, we find that saliva collection has reduced sensitivity (~30% less) relative to NPS. And in our convalescent cohort of patients greater than 8 days and less than 21 days from first symptom, we find that saliva has ~ 50% sensitivity relative to NPS. Our results suggest that rigorous studies in the intended populations should be performed before large-scale screening using saliva as the test matrix is initiated.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Performance of the Cue COVID-19 Molecular Test for Point of Care: Insights from a multi-site clinic service model 95%
- Comparison of Saliva and Mid-Turbinate Swabs for Detection of COVID-19 95%
- Investigating sensitivity of nasal or throat (ISNOT): A combination of both swabs increases sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and validation of a highly sensitive and specific electrochemical assay to quantify anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies to facilitate pandemic surveillance and monitoring of vaccine response 95%
- Performance of the TaqMan™ COVID-19 Pooling Kit for detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Asymptomatic and Symptomatic populations at an Institution of Higher Education 94%
- Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Point of Care Devices in the Laboratory and Clinical Setting 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Pooled Saliva Specimens for SARS-CoV-2 Testing 95%
- Clinical evaluation of self-collected saliva by RT-qPCR, direct RT-qPCR, RT-LAMP, and a rapid antigen test to diagnose COVID-19 94%
- Self-Collected Anterior Nasal and Saliva Specimens versus Healthcare Worker-Collected Nasopharyngeal Swabs for the Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of sample collection and transport strategies to enhance yield, accessibility, and biosafety of COVID-19 RT-PCR testing 96%
- Acceptable Performance of the Abbott ID NOW Among Symptomatic Individuals with Confirmed COVID-19 94%
- Combined oropharyngeal/nares and nasopharyngeal swab sampling remain effective for molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Self-Collected Oral Fluid and Nasal Swabs Demonstrate Comparable Sensitivity to Clinician Collected Nasopharyngeal Swabs for Covid-19 Detection 94%
- Sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) 94%
- Performance of Repeat BinaxNOW SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Testing in a Community Setting, Wisconsin, November-December 2020 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.