Estimating the false-negative test probability of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assays are used to test for infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. RT-PCR tests are highly specific and the probability of false positives is low, but false negatives are possible depending on swab type and time since symptom onset. Aim: To determine how the probability of obtaining a false-negative test in infected patients is affected by time since symptom onset and swab type. Methods: We used generalised additive mixed models to analyse publicly available data from patients who received multiple RT-PCR tests and were identified as SARS-CoV-2 positive at least once. Results: The probability of a positive test decreased with time since symptom onset, with oropharyngeal (OP) samples less likely to yield a positive result than nasopharyngeal (NP) samples. The probability of incorrectly identifying an uninfected individual due to a false-negative test was considerably reduced if negative tests were repeated 24 hours later. For a small false-positive test probability (<0.5%), the true number of infected individuals was larger than the number of positive tests. For a higher false-positive test probability, the true number of infected individuals was smaller than the number of positive tests. Conclusion: NP samples are more sensitive than OP samples. The later an infected individual is tested after symptom onset, the less likely they are to test positive. This has implications for identifying infected patients, contact tracing and discharging convalescing patients who are potentially still infectious.
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?
The mainstay of testing for SARS-CoV-2 is batch-processed laboratory PCR, which has imperfect sensitivity and requires specialist equipment.
“The mainstay of testing for SARS-CoV-2 is batch-processed laboratory PCR, which has imperfect sensitivity and requires specialist equipment.6, 7”
From Real-world evaluation of rapid and laboratory-free COVID-19 triage for emergency care: external validation and pilot deployment of artificial intelligence driven screening (2022) · cites this paper as [7]
The Introduction (page not available) says most infected individuals were identified using RT-PCR and explicitly describes its sensitivity as imperfect. The Discussion > Limitations mentions laboratories performing RT-PCR tests, but our copy does not establish that testing is batch-processed or requires specialist equipment. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 49 · Cited by 313
Research works printed but not linked: 36
- [2]Ai T Yang Z Hou H Zhan C Chen C Lv W Correlation of Chest CT and RT-PCR Testing for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A Report of 1014 Cases. Radiology. 2020; 296(2): E32- 40. 10.1148/radiol.2020200642 32101510 PMC7233399 · DOI
- [3]Fang Y Zhang H Xie J Lin M Ying L Pang P Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology. 2020; 296(2): E115- 7. 10.1148/radiol.2020200432 32073353 PMC7233365 · DOI
- [5]Zou L Ruan F Huang M Liang L Huang H Hong Z SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Upper Respiratory Specimens of Infected Patients. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382(12): 1177- 9. 10.1056/NEJMc2001737 32074444 PMC7121626 · DOI
- [8]Liu L Liu W Zheng Y Jiang X Kou G Ding J A preliminary study on serological assay for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 238 admitted hospital patients. Microbes Infect. 2020; 22(4-5): 206- 11. 10.1016/j.micinf.2020.05.008 32425648 PMC7233230 · DOI
- [9]Wu H, Hao Q, Wang Q. Difficulties in False Negative Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Case Report. Research Square. 13 Mar 2020. 10.21203/rs.3.rs-17319/v1 · DOI
- [10]Cao G Tang S Yang D Shi W Wang X Wang H The potential transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from patients with negative RT-PCR swab tests to others: two related clusters of COVID-19 outbreak. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2020; 73(6): 399- 403. 10.7883/yoken.JJID.2020.165 32475877 · DOI
- [11]Luo L Liu D Liao X-L Wu X-B Jing Q-L Zheng J-Z Modes of contact and risk of transmission in COVID-19 among close contacts. MedRxiv. 2020; 26 10.1101/2020.03.24.20042606 · DOI
- [12]Kujawski SA Wong KK Collins JP Epstein L Killerby ME Midgley CM Clinical and virologic characteristics of the first 12 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States. Nat Med. 2020; 26(6): 861- 8. 10.1038/s41591-020-0877-5 32327757 PMC12755114 · DOI
- [13]Danis K Epaulard O Bénet T Gaymard A Campoy S Botelho-Nevers E Cluster of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in the French Alps, 2020. Clin Infect Dis. 2020; 71(15): 825- 32. 10.1093/cid/ciaa424 32277759 PMC7184384 · DOI
- [14]Seah IYJ Anderson DE Kang AEZ Wang L Rao P Young BE Assessing Viral Shedding and Infectivity of Tears in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients. Ophthalmology. 2020; 127(7): 977- 9. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.026 32291098 PMC7151491 · DOI
- [15]Wyllie AL, Fournier J, Casanovas-Massana A, Campbell M, Tokuyama M, Vijayakumar P, et al. Saliva or Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens for Detection of SARS-CoV-2. N Engl J Med 2020; 383:1283-1286. medRxiv. 2020; 2020.04.16.20067835. 10.1056/NEJMc2016359 PMC7484747 32857487 · DOI
- [16]Young BE Ong SWX Kalimuddin S Low JG Tan SY Loh J Epidemiologic Features and Clinical Course of Patients Infected With SARS-CoV-2 in Singapore. JAMA. 2020; 323(15): 1488- 94. 10.1001/jama.2020.3204 32125362 PMC7054855 · DOI
- [17]Lescure F-X Bouadma L Nguyen D Parisey M Wicky P-H Behillil S Clinical and virological data of the first cases of COVID-19 in Europe: a case series. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020; 20(6): 697- 706. 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30200-0 32224310 PMC7156120 · DOI
- [19]Kim ES Chin BS Kang CK Kim NJ Kang YM Choi JP Clinical Course and Outcomes of Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection: a Preliminary Report of the First 28 Patients from the Korean Cohort Study on COVID-19. J Korean Med Sci. 2020; 35(13): e142. 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e142 32242348 PMC7131901 · DOI
- [20]Wood SN Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol. 2011; 73(1): 3- 36. 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00749.x · DOI
- [22]Bi Q Wu Y Mei S Ye C Zou X Zhang Z Epidemiology and transmission of COVID-19 in 391 cases and 1286 of their close contacts in Shenzhen, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020; 20(8): 911- 9. 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30287-5 32353347 PMC7185944 · DOI
- [24]Verity R Okell LC Dorigatti I Winskill P Whittaker C Imai N Estimates of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019: a model-based analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020; 20(6): 669- 77. 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30243-7 32240634 PMC7158570 · DOI · Paper page
- [25]Wu JT Leung K Bushman M Kishore N Niehus R de Salazar PM Estimating clinical severity of COVID-19 from the transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China. Nat Med. 2020; 26(4): 506- 10. 10.1038/s41591-020-0822-7 32284616 PMC7094929 · DOI
- [26]Cohen J Kupferschmidt K Countries test tactics in ‘war’ against COVID-19. Science. 2020; 367(6484): 1287- 8. 10.1126/science.367.6484.1287 32193299 · DOI
- [27]Lee D, Lee J. Testing on the move: South Korea’s rapid response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives. 2020. p. 100111. 10.1016/j.trip.2020.100111 PMC7172645 34171015 · DOI
- [28]Wu F, Wang A, Liu M, Wang Q, Chen J, Xia S, et al. Neutralizing antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in a COVID-19 recovered patient cohort and their implications. medRxiv. 20 Apr 2020. 10.1101/2020.03.30.20047365 · DOI · Paper page
- [29]Vabret N Britton GJ Gruber C Hegde S Kim J Kuksin M Immunology of COVID-19: Current State of the Science. Immunity. 2020; 52(6): 910- 41. 10.1016/j.immuni.2020.05.002 32505227 PMC7200337 · DOI · Paper page
- [30]Kellam P Barclay W The dynamics of humoral immune responses following SARS-CoV-2 infection and the potential for reinfection. J Gen Virol. 2020; 101(8): 791- 7. 10.1099/jgv.0.001439 32430094 PMC7641391 · DOI
- [31]Cervia C Nilsson J Zurbuchen Y Valaperti A Schreiner J Wolfensberger A Systemic and mucosal antibody secretion specific to SARS-CoV-2 during mild versus severe COVID-19. bioRxiv. 2020; 23 10.1101/2020.05.21.108308 PMC7677074 33221383 · DOI
- [32]Staines HM, Kirwan DE, Clark DJ, Adams ER, Augustin Y, Byrne RL, et al. Dynamics of IgG seroconversion and pathophysiology of COVID-19 infections. medRxiv. 9 Jun 2020. 10.1101/2020.06.07.20124636 · DOI
- [33]Solbach W Schiffner J Backhaus I Burger D Staiger R Tiemer B Antibody Profiling of COVID-19 Patients in an Urban Low-Incidence Region in Northern Germany. Front Public Health. 2020; 8: 570543. 10.3389/fpubh.2020.570543 33072707 PMC7536334 · DOI
- [36]Wang W Xu Y Gao R Lu R Han K Wu G Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Types of Clinical Specimens. JAMA. 2020; 323(18): 1843- 4. 10.1001/jama.2020.3786 32159775 PMC7066521 · DOI
- [37]Liu W-D Chang S-Y Wang J-T Tsai M-J Hung C-C Hsu C-L Prolonged virus shedding even after seroconversion in a patient with COVID-19. J Infect. 2020; 81(2): 318- 56. 32283147 PMC7151379
- [38]Bullard J, Dust K, Funk D, Strong JE, Alexander D, Garnett L, et al. Predicting infectious SARS-CoV-2 from diagnostic samples. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;ciaa638. 10.1093/cid/ciaa638 32442256 PMC7314198 · DOI · Paper page
- [39]He X Lau EHY Wu P Deng X Wang J Hao X Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. Nat Med. 2020; 26(5): 672- 5. 10.1038/s41591-020-0869-5 32296168 · DOI
- [40]van Kasteren PB, van der Veer B, van den Brink S, Wijsman L, de Jonge J, van den Brandt A, et al. Comparison of seven commercial RT-PCR diagnostic kits for COVID-19. Journal of clinical virology: the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology. 2020. p. 104412. PMC7206434 32416600
- [41]Chan JF-W Yip CC-Y To KK-W Tang TH-C Wong SC-Y Leung K-H Improved Molecular Diagnosis of COVID-19 by the Novel, Highly Sensitive and Specific COVID-19-RdRp/Hel Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR Assay Validated In Vitro and with Clinical Specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 2020; 58(5): 58. 10.1128/JCM.00310-20 32132196 PMC7180250 · DOI
- [42]Cohen AN Kessel B False positives in reverse transcription PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. MedRxiv. 2020; 28 10.1101/2020.04.26.20080911 · DOI
- [43]Cereda D, Tirani M, Rovida F, Demicheli V, Ajelli M, Poletti P, et al. The early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in Lombardy, Italy. arXiv. 2003.09320. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.09320 PMC8605863 34814093 · arXiv
- [44]Li R Pei S Chen B Song Y Zhang T Yang W Substantial undocumented infection facilitates the rapid dissemination of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV2). Science. 2020368(6490):489-93. 10.1126/science.abb3221 PMC7164387 32179701 · DOI · Paper page
- [45]Tong Z-D Tang A Li K-F Li P Wang H-L Yi J-P Potential Presymptomatic Transmission of SARS-CoV-2, Zhejiang Province, China, 2020. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020; 26(5): 1052- 4. 10.3201/eid2605.200198 32091386 PMC7181913 · DOI
- Authors
- Wikramaratna, P. S., Paton, R. S., Ghafari, M., & Lourenço, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Wikramaratna, Paul S
- Venue
- Eurosurveillance
- Published
- 2020-12-17
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 50
- ISSN
- 1025-496X (ISSN-L)
- 1560-7917
- PMC
- PMC7812420
- OpenAlex
- W3112465516
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 86 · 2020: 84
- FWCI
- 3.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Eurosurveillance (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University College, Oxford
- University of Oxford
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
- Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 pandemic, RT-PCR, test sensitivity, time since symptom onset, nasopharyngeal swab, throat swabs, retesting, false positive rate, contact tracing, infectious period, convalescent patients
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing, False Negative Reactions, Humans, Nasopharynx, Oropharynx, Probability, Sensitivity and Specificity, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
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