Evidence mapPaperPMID 35348276Full record

ReviewReviews in medical virology2022

Effectiveness of rapid antigen testing for screening of asymptomatic individuals to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A rapid review.

Kieran A Walsh, Natasha Broderick, Susan Ahern, Christopher G Fawsitt, Katie M O'Brien, Marie Carrigan, Patricia Harrington, Michelle O'Neill, Susan M Smith, Susan Spillane and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reviews in medical virology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies: A scoping review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kieran A WalshHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-4386-3012
Natasha BroderickHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Susan AhernHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Christopher G FawsittHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Katie M O'BrienHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-1853-5663
Marie CarriganHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Patricia HarringtonHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Michelle O'NeillHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Susan M SmithDepartment of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Susan SpillaneHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Conor TeljeurHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Máirín RyanHealth Information and Quality Authority, Dublin, Ireland.
Health and Safety Authority · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IETrinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) offer advantages over gold-standard reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests in that they are cheaper and provide faster results, thus enabling prompt isolation of positive SARS-CoV-2 cases and quarantine of close contacts. The aim of this study was to collate and synthesise empirical evidence on the effectiveness of rapid antigen testing for the screening (including serial testing) and surveillance of asymptomatic individuals to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. A rapid review was undertaken in MEDLINE (EBSCO), EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Library, Europe PMC and Google Scholar up until 19 July 2021, supplemented by a grey literature search. Of the identified 1222 records, 19 reports referring to 16 studies were included. Eight included studies examined the effectiveness of RADTs for population-level screening, four for pre-event screening and four for serial testing (schools, a prison, a university sports programme and in care homes). Overall, there is uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of rapid antigen testing for the screening of asymptomatic individuals to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. This uncertainty is due to the inconsistent results, the relatively low number of studies identified, the predominantly observational and/or uncontrolled nature of the study designs used, and concerns regarding methodological quality. Given this uncertainty, more real-world research evidence in relevant settings, which is of good quality and timely, as well as economic evaluation, is required to inform public policy on the widespread use of RADTs in asymptomatic individuals.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2COVID-19 TestingHumansMass ScreeningObservational Studies as TopicQuarantineantigenasymptomaticCovid-19rapid testingSARS-CoV-2screening

Identifiers

PMID35348276
PMCPMC9111057
OpenAlexW4220910577

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.