ArticleCommunications medicine2022
Machine learning to support visual auditing of home-based lateral flow immunoassay self-test results for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
Article in Communications medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of the mLab App: a randomized clinical trial for increasing HIV testing uptake using mobile technology.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Trial
- DeepBand: A Deep Learning-Enabled Multi-Stage Pipeline for Continuous Automated Quantification of Lateral Flow Assays.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Interpretable machine learning and signal processing for automated reading and quality control of lateral flow tests for schistosomiasis.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Trends of nucleic acid - based point-of-care diagnostics for infectious diseases.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- The evolution of next-generation lateral flow assays for bacterial and fungal diagnostics.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Review
- Emerging Trends in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Colorimetric Biosensors for Pathogen Diagnostics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- A Conversational Large-Language-Model Tutor that Accelerates Machine-Learning Method Development in Routine Bioanalytical Workflows.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2025Article
- AI-Powered Embedded System for Rapid Detection of Veterinary Antibiotic Residues in Food-Producing Animals.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Enhancing Sensitivity of Commercial Gold Nanoparticle-Based Lateral Flow Assays: A Comparative Study of Colorimetric and Photothermal Approaches.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Wearable In-Pad Diagnostic for the Detection of Disease Biomarkers in Menstruation Blood.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Machine learning in point-of-care testing: innovations, challenges, and opportunities.Nature communications · 2025Review
- Machine Learning-Based Quantification of Lateral Flow Assay Using Smartphone-Captured Images.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Sample preparation and detection methods in point-of-care devices towards future at-home testing.Lab on a chip · 2024Review
- Isothermal Nucleic Acid Amplification-Based Lateral Flow Testing for the Detection of Plant Viruses.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Measuring the performance of computer vision artificial intelligence to interpret images of HIV self-testing results.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Design and Implementation of a National Program to Monitor the Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG Antibodies in England Using Self-Testing: The REACT-2 Study.American journal of public health · 2023Article
- Review
- SARS-CoV-2 rapid antibody test results and subsequent risk of hospitalisation and death in 361,801 people.Nature communications · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) are being used worldwide for COVID-19 mass testing and antibody prevalence studies. Relatively simple to use and low cost, these tests can be self-administered at home, but rely on subjective interpretation of a test line by eye, risking false positives and false negatives. Here, we report on the development of ALFA (Automated Lateral Flow Analysis) to improve reported sensitivity and specificity. Methods: Our computational pipeline uses machine learning, computer vision techniques and signal processing algorithms to analyse images of the Fortress LFIA SARS-CoV-2 antibody self-test, and subsequently classify results as invalid, IgG negative and IgG positive. A large image library of 595,339 participant-submitted test photographs was created as part of the REACT-2 community SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence study in England, UK. Alongside ALFA, we developed an analysis toolkit which could also detect device blood leakage issues. Results: Automated analysis showed substantial agreement with human experts (Cohen's kappa 0.90-0.97) and performed consistently better than study participants, particularly for weak positive IgG results. Specificity (98.7-99.4%) and sensitivity (90.1-97.1%) were high compared with visual interpretation by human experts (ranges due to the varying prevalence of weak positive IgG tests in datasets). Conclusions: Given the potential for LFIAs to be used at scale in the COVID-19 response (for both antibody and antigen testing), even a small improvement in the accuracy of the algorithms could impact the lives of millions of people by reducing the risk of false-positive and false-negative result read-outs by members of the public. Our findings support the use of machine learning-enabled automated reading of at-home antibody lateral flow tests as a tool for improved accuracy for population-level community surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.