scholarly journals Suboptimal biological sampling as a probable cause of false-negative COVID-19 diagnostic test results

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie N. Kinloch ◽  
Gordon Ritchie ◽  
Chanson J. Brumme ◽  
Winnie Dong ◽  
Weiyan Dong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Marker ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Test Results ◽  
False Negatives ◽  
Human Dna ◽  
Biological Sampling

AbstractImproper nasopharyngeal swab collection could contribute to false-negative COVID-19 results. In support of this, specimens from confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases that tested negative or indeterminate (i.e. suspected false-negatives) contained less human DNA (a stable molecular marker of sampling quality) compared to a representative pool of specimens submitted for testing.

scholarly journals Suboptimal Biological Sampling as a Probable Cause of False-Negative COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Results

2020 ◽  
Vol 222 (6) ◽  
pp. 899-902 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie N Kinloch ◽  
Gordon Ritchie ◽  
Chanson J Brumme ◽  
Winnie Dong ◽  
Weiyan Dong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Human Dna ◽  
Health Response ◽  
Proper Training ◽  
Biological Sampling ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction

Abstract False-negative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test results can negatively impact the clinical and public health response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We used droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) to demonstrate that human DNA levels, a stable molecular marker of sampling quality, were significantly lower in samples from 40 confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases that yielded negative diagnostic test results (ie, suspected false-negative test results) compared with a representative pool of 87 specimens submitted for COVID-19 testing. Our results support suboptimal biological sampling as a contributor to false-negative COVID-19 test results and underscore the importance of proper training and technique in the collection of nasopharyngeal specimens.

scholarly journals Corrigendum to: Suboptimal Biological Sampling as a Probable Cause of False-Negative COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Results

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie N Kinloch ◽  
Gordon Ritchie ◽  
Chanson J Brumme ◽  
Winnie Dong ◽  
Weiyan Dong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Biological Sampling

scholarly journals ANALISIS MISKONSEPSI SISWA MENGGUNAKAN THREE TIER DIAGNOSTIC TEST BERBASIS OPEN ENDED QUESTION

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 276-291
Author(s):  
Mawaddah Mawaddah ◽  
Yandi Heryandi
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Research Method ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Large Percentage ◽  
Sampling Techniques ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
False Negatives ◽  
Clinical Interviews

This study aims to: (1) find out the misconceptions experienced by students in the material of similarity and congruence by using three-tier diagnostic tests based on open-ended questions. (2) find out the large percentage of students' misconceptions on the similarity and congruence material using a three-tier diagnostic test based on open-ended questions. The research method used was descriptive qualitative. The data collection instruments used were clinical interviews and three-tier diagnostic tests based on open-ended questions. This study was conducted in the SMP Negeri 2 Palimanan. The research subjects were selected using purposive sampling techniques so that 33 students were selected from 330 students. The results of the analysis of the three-tier diagnostic test based on open-ended questions showed that (1) the misconceptions that occurred in the material of similarity and congruence of 2D shapes included pure misconceptions, false positives, and false negatives. (2) the percentage of misconceptions experienced in the material of similarity and congruence 2D shapes as a whole was 50.2% with a large percentage of pure misconceptions 32.4%, false-positive 15.6%, and false-negative 2.2%

scholarly journals Does Empirical Clostridium difficile Infection (CDI) Therapy Result in False-Negative CDI Diagnostic Test Results?

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 494-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Venkata C. K. Sunkesula ◽  
Sirisha Kundrapu ◽  
Christine Muganda ◽  
Ajay K. Sethi ◽  
Curtis J. Donskey
Keyword(s):  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Clostridium Difficile Infection ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Therapy Result

scholarly journals COVID-19 pneumonia: Significance of diagnostic approaches other than PCR testing

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
Jovan Javorac ◽  
Dejan Živanović ◽  
Ana Milenković ◽  
Zvonko Dimoski
Keyword(s):  
False Negative ◽  
Fatal Outcome ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Lung Parenchyma ◽  
Diagnostic Methods ◽  
Pcr Analysis ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Radiological Findings ◽  
Diagnostic Approaches

The infection by SARS-CoV-2 virus leads to the development of COVID-19 disease, which can manifest asymptomatically, or cause pneumonia caracterised by mild to severe symptoms, with potential fatal outcome. The gold diagnostic standard for COVID-19 disease is the PCR analysis of biological materials sampled by nasopharyngeal swab. However, despite the high sensitivity of this diagnostic method, our clinical experience has shown that in some cases, false-negative PCR test results can be obtained. This paper reports a case of a patient with developed pneumonia that could be related to COVID-19 disease based on the clinical picture, laboratory and radiological findings, but two nasopharyngeal swabs were negative for SARS-CoV-2 after PCR analysis. The patient was treated with the therapy recommended for COVID-19, achieving both clinical and radiological improvement, which indicates that the infection by SARS-CoV-2 virus was probably the UN-derlying factor of of the inflammatory process in the lung parenchyma. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to highlight the importance of other diagnostic methods in diagnosing COVID-19, not only PCR testing.

scholarly journals Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey

BJGP Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen20X101007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian von Wagner ◽  
Wouter Verstraete ◽  
Yasemin Hirst ◽  
Brian D Nicholson ◽  
Sandro T Stoffel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Faecal Immunochemical Test ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Immunochemical Test

BackgroundThere has been interest in using the non-invasive, home-based quantitative faecal immunochemical test (FIT) to rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) in high-risk symptomatic patients.AimTo elicit public preferences for FIT versus colonoscopy (CC) and its delivery in primary care.Design & settingA cross-sectional online survey in England.MethodA total of 1057 adults (without CRC symptoms and diagnosis) aged 40–59 years were invited from an English online survey panel. Responders were asked to imagine they had been experiencing CRC symptoms that would qualify them for a diagnostic test. Participants were presented with choices between CC and FIT in ascending order of number of CRCs missed by FIT (from 1–10%). It was measured at what number of missed CRCs responders preferred CC over FIT.ResultsWhile 150 participants did not want either of the tests when both missed 1% CRCs, the majority (n = 741, 70.0%) preferred FIT to CC at that level of accuracy. However, this preference reduced to 427 (40.4%) when FIT missed one additional cancer. Women were more likely to tolerate missing CRC when using FIT. Having lower numeracy and perceiving a higher level of risk meant participants were less likely to tolerate a false negative test. Most of those who chose FIT preferred to return it by mail (62.2%), to be informed about normal test results by letter (42.1%), and about abnormal test results face to face (32.5%).ConclusionWhile the majority of participants preferred FIT over CC when both tests had the same sensitivity, tolerance for missed CRCs was low.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV2 Testing: The Limit of Detection Matters

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramy Arnaout ◽  
Rose A. Lee ◽  
Ghee Rye Lee ◽  
Cody Callahan ◽  
Christina F. Yen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Limit Of Detection ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
False Negative ◽  
False Negative Rate ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
False Negatives ◽  
Healthcare Network ◽  
Negative Rate

AbstractResolving the COVID-19 pandemic requires diagnostic testing to determine which individuals are infected and which are not. The current gold standard is to perform RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples. Best-in-class assays demonstrate a limit of detection (LoD) of ~100 copies of viral RNA per milliliter of transport media. However, LoDs of currently approved assays vary over 10,000-fold. Assays with higher LoDs will miss more infected patients, resulting in more false negatives. However, the false-negative rate for a given LoD remains unknown. Here we address this question using over 27,500 test results for patients from across our healthcare network tested using the Abbott RealTime SARS-CoV-2 EUA. These results suggest that each 10-fold increase in LoD is expected to increase the false negative rate by 13%, missing an additional one in eight infected patients. The highest LoDs on the market will miss a majority of infected patients, with false negative rates as high as 70%. These results suggest that choice of assay has meaningful clinical and epidemiological consequences. The limit of detection matters.

scholarly journals Sensitivity of different RT-qPCR solutions for SARS-CoV-2 detection

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Alcoba-Florez ◽  
Helena Gil-Campesino ◽  
Diego García-Martínez de Artola ◽  
Rafaela González-Montelongo ◽  
Agustín Valenzuela-Fernández ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
False Negative ◽  
Rna Extraction ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
False Negatives ◽  
Diagnostic Screening ◽  
Extraction Step ◽  
Wide Variability ◽  
One Step ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Impact

AbstractObjectiveThe ongoing COVID-19 pandemic continues imposing a demand for diagnostic screening. In anticipation that the recurrence of outbreaks and the measures for lifting the lockdown worldwide may cause supply chain issues over the coming months, we assessed the sensitivity of a number of one-step retrotranscription and quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) solutions to detect SARS-CoV-2.MethodsWe evaluated six different RT-qPCR alternatives for SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 diagnosis based on standard RNA extractions. That of best sensitivity was also assessed with direct nasopharyngeal swab viral transmission medium (VTM) heating, overcoming the RNA extraction step.ResultsWe found a wide variability in the sensitivity of RT-qPCR solutions that associated with a range of false negatives from as low as 2% (0.3-7.9%) to as much as 39.8% (30.2-50.2). Direct preheating of VTM combined with the best solution provided a sensitivity of 72.5% (62.5-81.0), in the range of some of the solutions based on standard RNA extractions.ConclusionsWe evidenced sensitivity limitations of currently used RT-qPCR solutions. Our results will help to calibrate the impact of false negative diagnoses of COVID-19, and to detect and control new SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks and community transmissions.

scholarly journals A 2-Gene Host Signature for Improved Accuracy of COVID-19 Diagnosis Agnostic to Viral Variants

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Albright ◽  
Eran Mick ◽  
Estella Sanchez-Guerrero ◽  
Jack Kamm ◽  
Anthea Mitchell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Rna Seq ◽  
Respiratory Illnesses ◽  
Improving Accuracy ◽  
Improved Accuracy ◽  
Positive Results

The continued emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants is one of several factors that may cause false negative viral PCR test results. Such tests are also susceptible to false positive results due to trace contamination from high viral titer samples. Host immune response markers provide an orthogonal indication of infection that can mitigate these concerns when combined with direct viral detection. Here, we leverage nasopharyngeal swab RNA-seq data from patients with COVID-19, other viral acute respiratory illnesses and non-viral conditions (n=318) to develop support vector machine classifiers that rely on a parsimonious 2-gene host signature to predict COVID-19. Optimal classifiers achieve an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) greater than 0.9 when evaluated on an independent RNA-seq cohort (n=553). We show that a classifier relying on a single interferon-stimulated gene, such as IFI6 or IFI44, measured in RT-qPCR assays (n=144) achieves AUC values as high as 0.88. Addition of a second gene, such as GBP5, significantly improves the specificity compared to other respiratory viruses. The performance of a clinically practical 2-gene RT-qPCR classifier is robust across common SARS-CoV-2 variants, including Omicron, and is unaffected by cross-contamination, demonstrating its utility for improving accuracy of COVID-19 diagnostics.

scholarly journals IDENTIFIKASI MISKONSEPSI MENGGUNAKAN TES DIAGNOSTIK THREE-TIER PADA HUKUM NEWTON DAN PENERAPANNYA

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-33
Author(s):  
Anna Shalihah ◽  
Diah Mulhayatiah ◽  
Fathiah Alatas
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Research Method ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Newton's Law ◽  
Newton’S Law ◽  
Two Stages

This research aims to identify misconceptions that occur in Newton's law and its application based on diagnostic test results of students of class X SMAN 6 Tangerang Selatan and show sub concepts that experienced the highest misconceptions and low. The research was conducted in October 2015 - January 2016. The research method used is descriptive-quantitative. This study was conducted in two stages: stage manufacture of instruments held in SMAN 6 and 4 Tangerang Selatan and the implementation phase of the research conducted at SMAN 6 Tangerang Selatan. The instrument used is a three-tier diagnostic test. Results obtained 20 questions about the making of a valid with validity 0.64 and reliability 0.78. Results of the discussion showed misconception that occurred at 32.50% with a false positive at 20.97% and false negative amounting to 11.67% and misconceptions highest in subconcepts legal principles III Newton with a percentage of 56.92% and the lowest in the subconcepts variety of force with a percentage of 24.08%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document