Comparison of unsupervised home self-collected midnasal swabs with clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swabs for detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Open accessAbstract
This diagnostic study compares unsupervised home self-collected midnasal swabs vs clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swabs for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Self-collection of specimens and delays in shipments could reduce sensitivity of virus detection by PCR; if this disproportionately affected those who received the vaccine, vaccine effectiveness would be overestimated.
“Finally, self-collection of specimens and delays in shipments could reduce sensitivity of virus detection by PCR (10); if this disproportionately affected those who received the vaccine (e.g., because of possible vaccine attenuation of virus shedding), vaccine effectiveness would be overestimated.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Upper Respiratory Specimens of Infected Patients
Zou, L., Ruan, F., Huang, M.-X., Liang, L.-J., Huang, H., Hong, Z.-S., Yu, J.-X., Kang, M., Song, Y.-C., Xia, J., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmc2001737 · Cited by 4,590 · see citing works
Estimating the false-negative test probability of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR
Wikramaratna, P. S., Paton, R. S., Ghafari, M., & Lourenço, J. (2020) · Eurosurveillance · doi:10.2807/1560-7917.es.2020.25.50.2000568 · Cited by 313 · see citing works
Estimating false-negative detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCRPreprint
Wikramaratna, P. S., Paton, R. S., Ghafari, M., et al. (2020) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2020.04.05.20053355 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Early Detection of Covid-19 through a Citywide Pandemic Surveillance Platform
Chu, H. Y., Englund, J. A., Starita, L. M., Famulare, M., Brandstetter, E., Nickerson, D. A., Rieder, M. J., Adler, A., Lacombe, K., Kim, A. E., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmc2008646 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Self-citationSeaman, C., Tran, L. N., Cowling, B. J., & Sullivan, S. G. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Virology · doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2019.07.010 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
He, Z., Zhuang, H., Zhao, C., et al. (2007) · Virology Journal · doi:10.1186/1743-422x-4-32 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- McCulloch, D. J., Kim, A. E., Wilcox, N. C., Logue, J. K., Greninger, A. L., Englund, J. A., & Chu, H. Y.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle
- Seattle Children's Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- McCulloch, Denise J.
- Venue
- JAMA Network Open
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2020-07-22
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e2016382
- ISSN
- 2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7376392
- OpenAlex
- W3045066376
- Cited by
- 111
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 15
- FWCI
- 3.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (T32AI007044)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
- Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 pandemic, nasopharyngeal swab, clinician-collected samples, sampling method comparison, virus detection
- MeSH terms
- Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Nasal Cavity, Nasopharynx, Pneumonia, Viral, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Specimen Handling, Coronavirus Infections, Clinical Laboratory Techniques, Viral Load, Pandemics, Observational Studies as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
