Back

Frequent testing regimen based on salivary samples for an effective COVID-19 containment strategy

Plebani, M.; Aita, A.; Cattelan, A. M.; Bonfante, F.; Padoan, A.; Giaquinto, C.; Basso, D.

2020-10-14 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.10.13.20210013 medRxiv
Show abstract

Rapid and accurate diagnostic tests are essential for controlling the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Although the current gold standard involves testing of nasopharyngeal swabs specimens by nucleic acid amplification test, such as real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) to detect the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it presents several limitations that ultimately may translate into a bottleneck in the surveillance regimen. New strategies based on frequent testing using less invasive specimens are urgently needed for containment of the infection. Rapid antigen assay using saliva as a reliable alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs should be proposed as a valuable part of the overall testing strategy.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Microbiology Spectrum
● 469 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
11.6%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Journal of Clinical Virology
○ 63 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Journal of Medical Virology
○ 140 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.6%
Similar papers in this journal
4
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 24%
6.6%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Emerging Infectious Diseases
● 105 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.3%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
● 130 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
7
Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
8
Diagnostics
○ 50 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
9
Viruses
○ 332 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
10
Microorganisms
○ 106 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.7%
11
Pathogens
○ 56 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.3%
12
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
13
Infectious Diseases and Therapy
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
14
Frontiers in Medicine
○ 120 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
15
Journal of Infection
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
16
Eurosurveillance
● 83 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
17
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
○ 62 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
18
Journal of Medical Microbiology
● 25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
19
Journal of Virological Methods
○ 37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
20
Clinical Chemistry
◐ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
21
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
22
Frontiers in Immunology
○ 638 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.4%
23
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
24
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 65%
1.1%
25
BMC Infectious Diseases
○ 133 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
26
Journal of Clinical Virology Plus
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.0%
27
Journal of Clinical Medicine
○ 97 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
28
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
29
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
30
Vaccines
○ 198 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%

"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.