đŸ•·ïž Crawler Inspector

URL Lookup

Direct Parameter Lookup

Raw Queries and Responses

1. Shard Calculation

Query:
Response:
Calculated Shard: 31 (from laksa007)

2. Crawled Status Check

Query:
Response:

3. Robots.txt Check

Query:
Response:

4. Spam/Ban Check

Query:
Response:

5. Seen Status Check

â„č Skipped - page is already crawled

📄
INDEXABLE
✅
CRAWLED
21 days ago
đŸ€–
ROBOTS ALLOWED

Page Info Filters

FilterStatusConditionDetails
HTTP statusPASSdownload_http_code = 200HTTP 200
Age cutoffPASSdownload_stamp > now() - 6 MONTH0.7 months ago
History dropPASSisNull(history_drop_reason)No drop reason
Spam/banPASSfh_dont_index != 1 AND ml_spam_score = 0ml_spam_score=0
CanonicalPASSmeta_canonical IS NULL OR = '' OR = src_unparsedNot set

Page Details

PropertyValue
URLhttps://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493
Last Crawled2026-03-18 17:19:20 (21 days ago)
First Indexed2021-08-08 07:14:20 (4 years ago)
HTTP Status Code200
Meta TitleDiagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Test Kits for Detecting SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 17,171 Suspected COVID-19 Patients | MDPI
Meta DescriptionEarly diagnosis is still as crucial as the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Meta Canonicalnull
Boilerpipe Text
Article 7 August 2021 , , , and 1 Gonoshasthaya-RNA Molecular Diagnostic and Research Center, Dhanmondi, Dhaka 1205, Bangladesh 2 Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia 3 Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia 4 Department of Haematology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia Abstract Early diagnosis is still as crucial as the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. As RT-PCR sometimes is not feasible in developing nations or rural areas, health professionals may use a rapid antigen test (RAT) to lessen the load of diagnosis. However, the efficacy of RAT is yet to be investigated thoroughly. Hence, we tried to evaluate the overall performance of RAT in SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Based on our PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42021231432), we searched online databases (i.e., PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science) and analysed overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT along with study quality, publication bias, heterogeneity and more. The overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT were detected as 99.4% (95% CI: 99.1–99.8; I 2 = 90%) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.8–75.9; I 2 = 98%), respectively. In subgroup analyses, nasopharyngeal specimens and symptomatic patient’s samples were more sensitive in RAT, while cycle threshold (Ct) values were found to have an inverse relationship with sensitivity. In the European and American populations, RAT showed better performance. Although the sensitivity of RAT is yet to be improved, it could still be an alternative in places with poor laboratory set up. Nevertheless, the negative samples of RAT can be re-tested using RT-PCR to reduce false negative results. 1. Introduction Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), characterised mainly by fever, cough, sore throat, fatigue, joint and muscle pain and loss of smell and taste [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. It was first identified in Hubei province in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and until now, it continues to be a significant health issue worldwide. Because there is no specific therapy or medication, early and accurate diagnosis is critical in preventing the spread of the disease [ 6 , 7 ]. In vitro diagnostics have long been recognised as a valuable tool for outbreak control and patient care [ 8 ]. The current gold standard diagnostic test for laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT); reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to be specific [ 9 ]. The advantage this has over other tests is its high sensitivity due to the nucleic acid amplification step while also having a high specificity due to the specific primers used. This is consistent with its purpose at referral centres, which is to advise clinical care of patients. However, since it can take several hours to obtain results from RT-PCR, it may be inappropriate to use during an emergency. It also requires costly technology and competent workers, both of which may not be accessible in remote health clinics, particularly in underdeveloped countries. Rapid antigen test (RAT) kits have emerged as an important alternative tool to aid in the clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. RAT is based on immunochromatography, which employs antibodies spotted onto nitrocellulose membranes that interact with specific antigens from the patient sample. The antigen–antibody interaction can be visualised manually or by using an immunofluorescence machine reader. For the diagnosis of COVID-19, the target analyte is often the virus’ nucleocapsid protein. A similar strategy has been used for the rapid diagnosis of HIV, malaria, influenza and other diseases [ 9 ]. It is a reasonably inexpensive and simple test with quick results that may be used for point-of-care testing [ 10 ]. The advantage of RAT is that the test is more accessible to patients. It also enables appropriate infection control measures to be instituted earlier which is important in a pandemic [ 10 , 11 ]. However, a negative RAT result cannot rule out COVID-19 infection [ 12 ]. Patients with typical clinical presentation or close contacts of COVID-19 cases should undergo repeat testing [ 12 , 13 ]. For diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, the World Health Organisation has recommended that a RAT kit needs to meet a minimum performance requirement of at least 80% sensitivity and 97% specificity compared with a NAAT reference assay to be used [ 14 ]. Studies regarding the diagnostic accuracy of RAT have produced a wide range of sensitivity. The varied results may be due to the various study designs, manufacturer of the RAT kits, patient selection, types of specimens and the phase of illness at the point of sample collection. While research and development of RAT to detect SARS-CoV-2 continue, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide an update on the diagnostic accuracy in terms of estimating the specificity and sensitivity of RAT kits in patients with suspected COVID-19. 2. Methods 2.1. Study Protocol and Guideline Based on the current literature, this systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic accuracy of the available RAT kits for COVID-19 diagnosis was undertaken according to the PRISMA guideline [ 15 ]. The protocol of this study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021231432). 2.2. Eligibility Criteria As the objective was to investigate the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the available RAT kits detecting SARS-CoV-2, we included studies in which RAT kits were used to identify SARS-CoV-2 to confirm COVID-19. Original studies without restricting study design or language were included. Review articles, opinions, case reports, news, press releases, blogs and data from websites were not considered eligible. 2.3. Search Strategies Based on the eligibility criteria, we searched online databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify studies of our interest published between 1 January 2020 and 13 January 2021. The following keywords were used to search different databases: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus, nCoV, antigen, detection, diagnostic, diagnosis, test, testing, assay, assays and combined with appropriate Boolean operators ( Table S1 ). Additionally, the reference lists of the included studies were also reviewed to identify any potentially eligible studies. EndNote X8 software (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used to identify and exclude duplicate studies. 2.4. Study Selection Three authors (S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.) independently screened the original pool of papers, then assessed their eligibility to be included in this meta-analysis using title, abstract, and full-text evaluation. Disagreements about whether a study should be included or excluded were discussed with the other authors (M.A.I. and Z.Z.D.) and resolved with acceptable consensus. 2.5. Data Extraction Three authors (S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.) independently undertook the data extraction, and two authors (M.A.I. and Z.Z.D.) validated it. Initially, the data of the total number of positive and negative specimens confirmed by a reference standard followed by the number of positive and negative results of those same specimens were evaluated through RAT kits and they were extracted from each of the eligible studies. The major characteristics of the studies including the Study ID (last name of the first author and year of publication), location, total number of subjects, percentage of female subjects, the mean or median age of the participants, type of participants, specimen types, the test method of RAT kit used, percentages of positive samples detected by the reference standard (RT-PCR), ranges of Ct values of the reference standard and the manufacturer of the RAT kits were documented. 2.6. Quality Assessment Two authors (S.S.K. and M.A.I.) independently assessed the quality of the included studies following the diagnostic test accuracy quality assessment tool of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). To resolve the discrepancies, all authors took part in the discussion and resolved with consensus. If the total score was ≀49, 50–69, or ≄70%, the studies were classed as low-quality (high-risk of bias), moderate-quality (moderate-risk of bias), or high-quality (low risk of bias) [ 16 ]. To detect publication bias, funnel plots were constructed, and the Egger’s test was performed. 2.7. Data Analyses A random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was used to analyse the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of the RAT kit to detect COVID-19. I 2 statistics were used to analyse heterogeneity among the included studies ( I 2 > 75% indicating substantial heterogeneity), followed by Cochran’s Q test to determine the significance of the heterogeneity ( p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant). Furthermore, a Galbraith plot was generated to determine the outlier studies. 2.8. Subgroup and Sensitivity Analyses Subgroup analyses were undertaken to investigate sensitivity and specificity based on symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, days of symptom onset, types of specimen, Ct values, countries, continents and manufacturers of RAT. To investigate the robustness of results and the possible source of heterogeneity, sensitivity analyses were performed through strategies such as excluding small studies (<100), excluding low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model, and excluding outlier studies. The analyses and plots were constructed by using the metaprop codes in the meta (version 4.15-1) and metafor (version 2.4-0) packages of R (version 3.6.3) in RStudio (RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA, USA) (version 1.3.1093). 3. Results 3.1. Study Selection Primarily, based on the search strategies, a total of 1201 published articles were identified from the online databases. During the initial screening process, 872 articles including review articles ( n = 31), case reports ( n = 7), articles that included non-human subjects ( n = 18), editorials, letters and comment ( n = 65) and duplicate studies ( n = 751) were excluded. From the remaining 329 studies, 300 studies did not comply with the objective of this meta-analysis (irrelevant to the objective of the meta-analysis, repetitive studies, protocols only or missing data of interest); hence regarded as ineligible. The remaining 29 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were finally included in this meta-analysis ( Figure 1 ). Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of study selection. 3.2. Characteristics of the Included Studies A total of 17,171 COVID-19 suspects, including RT-PCR-positive and negative participants who were further tested in RAT, were reported in this meta-analysis. Different types of specimen (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, nasal swab, sputum, throat swab or endotracheal aspirates) were taken from suspected symptomatic or asymptomatic participants. The RT-PCR-positive participants had a wide range of Ct values. Although a total of 15 different RAT kits were assessed from 13 different manufacturers, the RAT test methods were based on either immunochromatographic (ICG) assay or fluorescence immunoassay (FIA). The studies were carried out in several countries encompassing five continents. Table 1 shows the detailed features of the studies we included. Table 1. Major characteristics of the included studies. 3.3. Quality Assessment and Publication Bias The quality of each of the included studies was extensively examined using the JBI diagnostic accuracy checklist where the highest and lowest quality scores of the included studies were recorded as 88.8% (five studies) and 55.5% (two studies), respectively. Overall, there were no low-quality studies, 26.6% of high-quality, and 72.4% of moderate-quality studies ( Table S2 ). There was no indication of substantial publication bias in the funnel plots evaluating the specificity and sensitivity of RAT kits to confirm SARS-CoV-2 ( Figure 2 ). Figure 2. Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating ( A ) specificity and ( B ) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. 3.4. Meta-Analysis The overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT were 99.4% (95% CI: 99.1–99.8; I 2 = 90%) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.8–75.9; I 2 = 98%), respectively ( Figure 3 ). Four outlier studies [ 20 , 33 , 38 , 44 ] were identified using the Galbraith plot ( Figure 4 ). Except for the pooled specificity of subgroups based on specimen types (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab: 71.0% (95% CI: 14.1–100.1) and saliva: 80.7% (95% CI: 41.8–100.0)), the specificity did not vary in most of the subgroups and ranged between 99 and 100% ( Table 2 and Figure S1 ). On the other hand, in subgroup analyses, the sensitivity for each subgroup was lower than the specificity. Each of the subgroups estimating the sensitivity had high levels of heterogeneity except for the subgroups defined by the onset of symptoms (<5 and >5 days; I 2 = 0%) and Ct values (Ct values ≀20 and 36–40; I 2 = 0%). When compared with asymptomatic patients (54.5%), the sensitivity of RAT kits was higher in symptomatic patients (78.5%). The sensitivity of the nasopharyngeal swab was higher (70.1%) than that of saliva (50.4%) and throat swab or saliva (38.4%). The CT indicates the number of cycles needed for the fluorescence signals to reach the threshold. Ct value for a particular gene (i.e., N, ORF, E, S or M) is inversely correlated with viral load in a targeted specimen [ 45 , 46 ]. Surprisingly, the sensitivity of RAT kits was shown to have an inverse relationship with the Ct values, which also corresponded with the sensitivity of subgroups based on the symptom onset days ( Table 2 and Figure S1 ). The sensitivity of RAT kits dropped to 15.1% and 16.5% when Ct values were 31–35 and 36–40, respectively. On the other hand, the RAT kits had a lower sensitivity when used in the African (56.4%) and Asian (65.0%) populations compared with the European (70.0%) and American populations (74.1%). Kits from different manufacturers exhibited various sensitivity. Panbio TM showed the highest sensitivity (75.1%) followed by Abbott BinaxNOWℱ (74.8%), Standardℱ (66.4%) and Biocredit (42.7%). Figure 3. Forest plots representing estimating of ( A ) specificity and ( B ) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. Figure 4. Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating ( A ) specificity and ( B ) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. Table 2. Pooled specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection using the rapid antigen test kit. 3.5. Sensitivity Analyses To assess the range in outcomes, sensitivity analyses were performed removing small studies ( n < 100), low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model instead of a random-effects model, and omitting outlier studies. Surprisingly, the specificity of RAT kits for each of the sensitivity analysis results remained very constant when compared to the total pooled specificity (99.4%), ranging from 99.4% to 99.9% ( Table 3 and Figure S2 ). Using a fixed-effects model, the overall pooled sensitivity was enhanced to 79.9% as compared with the overall pooled sensitivity observed using the random-effects model (68.4%). However, when small ( n < 100) studies, low- and moderate-quality studies, and outlier studies were excluded, the sensitivity of RAT kits was found to be 62.0%, 69.8%, and 71.2%, respectively, which was close to the overall pooled sensitivity (68.4%) ( Table 3 and Figure S2 ). Table 3. Sensitivity analyses. 4. Discussion RT-PCR has been recognised as the diagnostic gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis to date; however, it has several drawbacks, including false-negative and false-positive findings [ 47 , 48 ]. The rate of false-negative results was estimated to be about 67% in the first 4–5 days following the onset of symptoms. [ 48 ]. On the other hand, the reasons behind the false-positive results were contamination during specimen collection, contamination of reagents, PCR amplicons, cross-contamination of the sample, and cross-reaction with other genetic materials or viruses [ 47 ]. Even in a cohort study, chest CT was found to be more sensitive (88%) as compared with the diagnostic result of RT-PCR (59%) [ 49 ]. Additionally, RT-PCR is costly and requires well-equipped laboratories [ 47 , 48 , 50 ]. More importantly, the release of RT-PCR results in many instances may take longer than expected due to high sample volumes and a lack of technical support, leading to delayed management of patients and control of outbreaks. As a result, an emphasis on developing RAT kits was necessary to close the diagnostic gaps. So far, several RAT kits have been developed by various manufacturers from multiple countries and evaluated independently by researchers. We observed that most of the RATs were developed based on either ICG assay or FIA. Although both the assays are generally based on the antibody–antigen interaction technique, for the detection, a signal generator (i.e., gold colloid) is used in ICG whereas a fluorescent molecule is bound to the detection antibody in FIA [ 51 , 52 , 53 ]. In this meta-analysis, we looked at the overall sensitivity and specificity of the available reported RAT kits. We found that although the overall pooled specificity (99.4%) was acceptable, the overall pooled sensitivity (68.4%) was not. Except in a few subgroups where there was a lot of heterogeneity across the studies, overall, the specificity did not differ substantially in the subgroup analysis. The study results, on the other hand, differed considerably when it came to assessing the sensitivity. Interestingly, the sensitivity of RAT kits for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients was 78.5% and 54.5%, respectively, indicating that RAT kits can identify both kinds of patient, albeit at a lower detection rate in the latter patient group. However, early detection is critical for RAT, as the sensitivity maintained at 82.0% when the symptom onset came after less than 5 days but dropped to 75.1% after five days. In the case of RT-PCR, a similar association between days of symptom onset and correct diagnosis had been reported [ 48 ]. This correlation was further justified when we analysed the correlation between Ct values and sensitivity. Previously, an analogous observation was investigated where a negative correlation of Ct values of RT-PCR and sensitivity in just one antigen kit for a specimen was identified [ 54 ]. When we checked the overall scenario with the studies we included, we found a similar inverse correlation of Ct values and sensitivity. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the higher Ct value (>33) can be considered as a non-contagious stage [ 55 ] which can justify the usage of RAT kits. However, early diagnosis using RAT kits can be suggested according to these observations. Again, among different specimen types, the nasopharyngeal swab was identified to be the best for SARS-CoV-2 identification using RAT kits. A recent study also suggested that the nasopharyngeal swab is more sensitive (89%) as compared with saliva (72%) to detect SARS-CoV-2 which confirms our findings [ 56 ]. In the current study, when the RAT sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2 in people from various continents and nations was examined, it was demonstrated that the sensitivity of RAT in the population of Europe and America was higher as compared to that of Asia and Africa. Because most RAT kits are manufactured in European countries, China, and Korea, the sensitivity may have diminished in Asia and Africa owing to issues during RAT kit transportation. As reported earlier, a repetitive freeze-thaw process during transportation can change the behaviour of proteins used in RAT kits [ 57 ]. This was further justified when a study by Gupta et al. [ 26 ] from India exhibited a much higher sensitivity (81.8% (95% CI: 73.2–90.4)) and the RAT kit used in this study was in fact manufactured in India. Hence, based on our findings, it can be suggested that local manufacturers or inventors should be prioritised for the RAT kit development and utilisation. Further investigations are required to determine the correlation of different sample conditions such as transportation or storage with the sensitivity of RAT. Again, recent reports about different genetic and structural mutations of SARS-CoV-2 enhance the possibility to hamper the sensitivity of diagnostic tools [ 58 , 59 ]. Hence, researchers need to focus on the improvement of sensitivity of RAT without compromising the specificity to detect both the original and mutated variants of SARS-CoV-2. Results of this meta-analysis support the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19 that the sensitivity of RAT kits is highly correlated with viral load, symptoms, and the timing of the test in relation to the onset of symptoms [ 60 ]. This meta-analysis also shows that the sensitivity of RAT kits differs depending on the manufacturer and the country in which the kits are produced. 5. Conclusions To summarise, the use of RAT kits is largely recommended for the early detection of patients suspected of having COVID-19, particularly in densely populated and isolated locations with limited resources and laboratory equipment. It may also be useful for prompt diagnosis in central city or rural areas. However, the negative RAT samples may need to be further analysed using molecular tests to confirm the results, particularly when the symptoms of COVID-19 are present. Supplementary Materials The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm10163493/s1 , Table S1: Search strategies, Table S2: Quality assessment of the included studies, Figure S1: Subgroup analyses based on the presence of symptoms, symptom onset, specimen types, Ct values, continents, countries, and kit manufacturers estimating the pooled specificity (A-AA) and sensitivity (AB-BJ) using rapid antigen test kit to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, Figure S2: Sensitivity analyses excluding small studies (<100), excluding low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model, and excluding outlier studies estimating polled specificity (A–D) and sensitivity (E–H) using a rapid antigen test kit to diagnose SARS-CoV-2. Author Contributions Conceptualization, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; methodology, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.; software, M.A.I.; validation, R.H.S., and M.A.I.; formal analysis, M.A.I.; investigation, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.; resources, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I.; data curation, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S.K. and N.H.H.N.H.; writing—review and editing, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; visualization, R.H.S.; supervision, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I.; project administration, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; funding acquisition, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding This research was funded by the Universiti Sains Malaysia Research University Grant 1001/PPSP/8012382. Institutional Review Board Statement Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement Not applicable. Data Availability Statement The data presented in this study are available in the main text and supplementary materials . Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. References Islam, M.A.; Kundu, S.; Alam, S.S.; Hossan, T.; Kamal, M.A.; Hassan, R. Prevalence and characteristics of fever in adult and paediatric patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis of 17515 patients. PLoS ONE 2021 , 16 , e0249788. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Abdullah, B. Prevalence of Olfactory Dysfunction in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Meta-analysis of 27,492 Patients. Laryngoscope 2021 , 131 , 865–878. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Abdullah, B. Prevalence and Characteristics of Taste Disorders in Cases of COVID-19: A Meta-analysis of 29,349 Patients. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2020 , 165 , 33–42. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Islam, M.A.; Alam, S.S.; Kundu, S.; Hossan, T.; Kamal, M.A.; Cavestro, C. Prevalence of Headache in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 14,275 Patients. Front. Neurol. 2020 , 11 , 562634. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Guan, W.-J.; Ni, Z.-Y.; Hu, Y.; Liang, W.-H.; Ou, C.-Q.; He, J.-X.; Liu, L.; Shan, H.; Lei, C.-L.; Hui, D.S. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020 , 382 , 1708–1720. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Pfefferle, S.; Reucher, S.; Nörz, D.; LĂŒtgehetmann, M. Evaluation of a quantitative RT-PCR assay for the detection of the emerging coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 using a high throughput system. Eurosurveillance 2020 , 25 , 2000152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ] LeBlanc, J.J.; Gubbay, J.B.; Li, Y.; Needle, R.; Arneson, S.R.; Marcino, D.; Charest, H.; Desnoyers, G.; Dust, K.; Fattouh, R. Real-time PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 detection in Canadian laboratories. J. Clin. Virol. 2020 , 128 , 104433. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] US Food and Drug Administration. In Vitro Diagnostics EUAs. Updated January 14. Available online: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/vitro-diagnostics-euas (accessed on 21 April 2021). D’Cruz, R.J.; Currier, A.W.; Sampson, V.B. Laboratory testing methods for novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2020 , 8 , 468. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Torres, I.; Poujois, S.; Albert, E.; Álvarez, G.; Colomina, J.; Navarro, D. Point-of-care evaluation of a rapid antigen test (CLINITEST Ⓡ Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test) for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. J. Infect. 2021 , 82 , 11–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Peeling, R.W.; Olliaro, P.L.; Boeras, D.I.; Fongwen, N. Scaling up COVID-19 rapid antigen tests: Promises and challenges. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2021 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Albert, E.; Torres, I.; Bueno, F.; Huntley, D.; Molla, E.; FernĂĄndez-Fuentes, M.Á.; MartĂ­nez, M.; Poujois, S.; ForquĂ©, L.; Valdivia, A. Field evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for COVID-19 diagnosis in primary healthcare centres. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2020 , 27 , 7–10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Mina, M.J.; Parker, R.; Larremore, D.B. Rethinking Covid-19 test sensitivity—A strategy for containment. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020 , 383 , e120. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] World Health Organization. Antigen-Detection in the Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Rapid Immunoassays: Interim Guidance. 11 September 2020. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/antigen-detection-in-the-diagnosis-of-sars-cov-2infection-using-rapid-immunoassays (accessed on 28 April 2021). Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Group, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009 , 6 , e1000097. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ] Chia, Y.C.; Islam, M.A.; Hider, P.; Woon, P.Y.; Johan, M.F.; Hassan, R.; Ramli, M. The Prevalence of TET2 Gene Mutations in Patients with BCR-ABL-Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers 2021 , 13 , 3078. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Abdelrazik, A.M.; Elshafie, S.M.; Abdelaziz, H.M. Potential Use of Antigen-Based Rapid Test for SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Specimens in Low-Resource Settings in Egypt for Symptomatic Patients and High-Risk Contacts. Lab. Med. 2020 , 52 , 46–49. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] AgullĂł, V.; FernĂĄndez-GonzĂĄlez, M.; de la Tabla, V.O.; Gonzalo-JimĂ©nez, N.; GarcĂ­a, J.A.; MasiĂĄ, M.; GutiĂ©rrez, F. Evaluation of the rapid antigen test Panbio COVID-19 in saliva and nasal swabs in a population-based point-of-care study. J. Infect. 2020 , 82 , 186–230. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Alemany, A.; Baro, B.; Ouchi, D.; RodĂł, P.; Ubals, M.; Corbacho-MonnĂ©, M.; Vergara-Alert, J.; Rodon, J.; SegalĂ©s, J.; Esteban, C. Analytical and clinical performance of the panbio COVID-19 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test. J. Infect. 2020 , 82 , 186–230. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Azzi, L.; Baj, A.; Alberio, T.; Lualdi, M.; Veronesi, G.; Carcano, G.; Ageno, W.; Gambarini, C.; Maffioli, L.; Di Saverio, S. Rapid Salivary Test suitable for a mass screening program to detect SARS-CoV-2: A diagnostic accuracy study. J. Infect. 2020 , 81 , 75–78. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Cerutti, F.; Burdino, E.; Milia, M.G.; Allice, T.; Gregori, G.; Bruzzone, B.; Ghisetti, V. Urgent need of rapid tests for SARS CoV-2 antigen detection: Evaluation of the SD-Biosensor antigen test for SARS-CoV-2. J. Clin. Virol. 2020 , 132 , 104654. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Chaimayo, C.; Kaewnaphan, B.; Tanlieng, N.; Athipanyasilp, N.; Sirijatuphat, R.; Chayakulkeeree, M.; Angkasekwinai, N.; Sutthent, R.; Puangpunngam, N.; Tharmviboonsri, T. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay in comparison with real-time RT-PCR assay for laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in Thailand. Virol. J. 2020 , 17 , 177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Diao, B.; Wen, K.; Zhang, J.; Chen, J.; Han, C.; Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Deng, G.; Zhou, H.; Wu, Y. Accuracy of a nucleocapsid protein antigen rapid test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2020 , 27 , 289.e1–289.e4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Fenollar, F.; Bouam, A.; Ballouche, M.; Fuster, L.; Prudent, E.; Colson, P.; Tissot-Dupont, H.; Million, M.; Drancourt, M.; Raoult, D. Evaluation of the Panbio Covid-19 rapid antigen detection test device for the screening of patients with COVID-19. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020 , 59 , e02589-20. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Gremmels, H.; Winkel, B.M.; Schuurman, R.; Rosingh, A.; Rigter, N.A.; Rodriguez, O.; Ubijaan, J.; Wensing, A.M.; Bonten, M.J.; Hofstra, L.M. Real-life validation of the Panbioℱ COVID-19 antigen rapid test (Abbott) in community-dwelling subjects with symptoms of potential SARS-CoV-2 infection. EClinicalMedicine 2021 , 31 , 100677. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Gupta, A.; Khurana, S.; Das, R.; Srigyan, D.; Singh, A.; Mittal, A.; Singh, P.; Soneja, M.; Kumar, A.; Singh, A.K. Rapid chromatographic immunoassay-based evaluation of COVID-19: A cross-sectional, diagnostic test accuracy study & its implications for COVID-19 management in India. Indian J. Med. Res. 2020 , 153 , 126–131. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] KrĂŒttgen, A.; Cornelissen, C.G.; Dreher, M.; Hornef, M.W.; Imöhl, M.; Kleines, M. Comparison of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid antigen test to the real star Sars-CoV-2 RT PCR kit. J. Virol. Methods 2021 , 288 , 114024. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Linares, M.; PĂ©rez-Tanoira, R.; Carrero, A.; Romanyk, J.; PĂ©rez-GarcĂ­a, F.; GĂłmez-Herruz, P.; Arroyo, T.; Cuadros, J. Panbio antigen rapid test is reliable to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 7 days after the onset of symptoms. J. Clin. Virol. 2020 , 133 , 104659. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Lindner, A.K.; Nikolai, O.; Kausch, F.; Wintel, M.; Hommes, F.; Gertler, M.; KrĂŒger, L.J.; Gaeddert, M.; Tobian, F.; Lainati, F. Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with self-collected anterior nasal swab versus professional-collected nasopharyngeal swab. Eur. Respir. J. 2020 , 57 , 2003961. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Liotti, F.M.; Menchinelli, G.; Lalle, E.; Palucci, I.; Marchetti, S.; Colavita, F.; La Sorda, M.; Sberna, G.; Bordi, L.; Sanguinetti, M. Performance of a novel diagnostic assay for rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in nasopharynx samples. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2020 , 27 , 487–488. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Mak, G.C.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Chow, N.L.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Analytical sensitivity and clinical sensitivity of the three rapid antigen detection kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J. Clin. Virol. 2020 , 133 , 104684. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Mak, G.C.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Chow, N.L.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Evaluation of rapid antigen detection kit from the WHO Emergency Use List for detecting SARS-CoV-2. J. Clin. Virol. 2021 , 134 , 104712. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Mak, G.C.; Cheng, P.K.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J. Clin. Virol. 2020 , 129 , 104500. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Nalumansi, A.; Lutalo, T.; Kayiwa, J.; Watera, C.; Balinandi, S.; Kiconco, J.; Nakaseegu, J.; Olara, D.; Odwilo, E.; Serwanga, J. Field evaluation of the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test in Uganda using nasopharyngeal samples. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2021 , 104 , 282–286. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Pilarowski, G.; Lebel, P.; Sunshine, S.; Liu, J.; Crawford, E.; Marquez, C.; Rubio, L.; Chamie, G.; Martinez, J.; Peng, J. Performance characteristics of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay at a public plaza testing site in San Francisco. medRxiv 2020 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Pilarowski, G.; Marquez, C.; Rubio, L.; Peng, J.; Martinez, J.; Black, D.; Chamie, G.; Jones, D.; Jacobo, J.; Tulier-Laiwa, V. Field performance and public health response using the BinaxNOW TM Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay during community-based testing. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Porte, L.; Legarraga, P.; Vollrath, V.; Aguilera, X.; Munita, J.M.; Araos, R.; Pizarro, G.; Vial, P.; Iruretagoyena, M.; Dittrich, S. Evaluation of a novel antigen-based rapid detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2020 , 99 , 328–333. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Scohy, A.; Anantharajah, A.; BodĂ©us, M.; Kabamba-Mukadi, B.; Verroken, A.; Rodriguez-Villalobos, H. Low performance of rapid antigen detection test as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosis. J. Clin. Virol. 2020 , 129 , 104455. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Strömer, A.; Rose, R.; SchĂ€fer, M.; Schön, F.; Vollersen, A.; Lorentz, T.; Fickenscher, H.; Krumbholz, A. Performance of a Point-of-Care Test for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen. Microorganisms 2021 , 9 , 58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Toptan, T.; Eckermann, L.; Pfeiffer, A.E.; Hoehl, S.; Ciesek, S.; Drosten, C.; Corman, V.M. Evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: Potential to help reduce community spread? J. Clin. Virol. 2021 , 135 , 104713. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Torres, I.; Poujois, S.; Albert, E.; Colomina, J.; Navarro, D. Evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device) for SARS-CoV-2 detection in asymptomatic close contacts of COVID-19 patients. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2021 , 27 , 636.e1–636.e4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Turcato, G.; Zaboli, A.; Pfeifer, N.; Ciccariello, L.; Sibilio, S.; Tezza, G.; Ausserhofer, D. Clinical application of a rapid antigen test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients evaluated in the emergency department: A preliminary report. J. Infect. 2020 , 82 , 14–16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Weitzel, T.; Legarraga, P.; Iruretagoyena, M.; Pizarro, G.; Vollrath, V.; Araos, R.; Munita, J.M.; Porte, L. Comparative evaluation of four rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection tests using universal transport medium. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2021 , 39 , 101942. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Yamayoshi, S.; Sakai-Tagawa, Y.; Koga, M.; Akasaka, O.; Nakachi, I.; Koh, H.; Maeda, K.; Adachi, E.; Saito, M.; Nagai, H. Comparison of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19. Viruses 2020 , 12 , 1420. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Oishee, M.J.; Ali, T.; Jahan, N.; Khandker, S.S.; Haq, M.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Sil, B.K.; Lugova, H.; Krishnapillai, A.; Abubakar, A.R. COVID-19 pandemic: Review of contemporary and forthcoming detection tools. Infect. Drug Resist. 2021 , 14 , 1049–1082. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Rao, S.N.; Manissero, D.; Steele, V.R.; Pareja, J. A narrative systematic review of the clinical utility of cycle threshold values in the context of COVID-19. Infect. Dis. Ther. 2020 , 9 , 573–586. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Surkova, E.; Nikolayevskyy, V.; Drobniewski, F. False-positive COVID-19 results: Hidden problems and costs. Lancet Respir. Med. 2020 , 8 , 1167–1168. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Kucirka, L.M.; Lauer, S.A.; Laeyendecker, O.; Boon, D.; Lessler, J. Variation in false-negative rate of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction–based SARS-CoV-2 tests by time since exposure. Ann. Intern. Med. 2020 , 173 , 262–267. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Ai, T.; Yang, Z.; Hou, H.; Zhan, C.; Chen, C.; Lv, W.; Tao, Q.; Sun, Z.; Xia, L. Correlation of chest CT and RT-PCR testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A report of 1014 cases. Radiology 2020 , 296 , 32–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ] Sil, B.K.; Jahan, N.; Haq, M.A.; Oishee, M.J.; Ali, T.; Khandker, S.S.; Kobatake, E.; Mie, M.; Khondoker, M.U.; Jamiruddin, M.R. Development and performance evaluation of a rapid in-house ELISA for retrospective serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2. PLoS ONE 2021 , 16 , e0246346. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Paek, S.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Cho, J.-H.; Kim, Y.-S. Development of rapid one-step immunochromatographic assay. Methods 2000 , 22 , 53–60. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ] Odell, I.D.; Cook, D. Immunofluorescence techniques. J. Investig. Dermatol. 2013 , 133 , e4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ] Sil, B.K.; Jamiruddin, M.R.; Haq, M.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Jahan, N.; Khandker, S.S.; Ali, T.; Oishee, M.J.; Kaitsuka, T.; Mie, M. AuNP Coupled Rapid Flow-Through Dot-Blot Immuno-Assay for Enhanced Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Specific Nucleocapsid and Receptor Binding Domain IgG. Int. J. Nanomed. 2021 , 16 , 4739–4753. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Lanser, L.; Bellmann-Weiler, R.; Öttl, K.-W.; Huber, L.; Griesmacher, A.; Theurl, I.; Weiss, G. Evaluating the clinical utility and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in relation to RT-PCR Ct values. Infection 2020 , 49 , 555–557. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interim Guidance on Ending Isolation and Precautions for Adults with COVID-19. 2021. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html (accessed on 28 April 2021). Jamal, A.J.; Mozafarihashjin, M.; Coomes, E.; Powis, J.; Li, A.X.; Paterson, A.; Anceva-Sami, S.; Barati, S.; Crowl, G.; Faheem, A. Sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2021 , 72 , 1064–1066. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Zhao, L.; Li, L.; Liu, G.-q.; Chen, L.; Liu, X.; Zhu, J.; Li, B. Effect of freeze–thaw cycles on the molecular weight and size distribution of gluten. Food Res. Int. 2013 , 53 , 409–416. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ] Adnan, N.; Khondoker, M.U.; Rahman, M.S.; Ahmed, M.F.; Sharmin, S.; Sharif, N.; Azmuda, N.; Akter, S.; Nahar, S.; Mou, T.J. Coding-complete genome sequences and mutation profiles of nine SARS-CoV-2 strains detected from COVID-19 patients in Bangladesh. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 2021 , 10 , e00124-21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] Singh, J.; Samal, J.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, J.; Agrawal, U.; Ehtesham, N.Z.; Sundar, D.; Rahman, S.A.; Hira, S.; Hasnain, S.E. Structure-function analyses of new SARS-CoV-2 variants B. 1.1. 7, B. 1.351 and B. 1.1. 28.1: Clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic and public health implications. Viruses 2021 , 13 , 439. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] Hanson, K.E.; Altayar, O.; Caliendo, A.M.; Arias, C.A.; Englund, J.A.; Hayden, M.K.; Lee, M.J.; Loeb, M.; Patel, R.; El Alayli, A. The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Antigen Testing. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2021 , 23 . Version 1.0.0. Available online: https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/covid-19-guideline-antigen-testing (accessed on 25 July 2021). Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). Article Metrics Citations 94 55 54 87 Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Markdown
[Skip to Content](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#main) You are currently on the new version of our website. Access the old version here . Close [![MDPI](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=56,h=30/https://mdpi-res.com/data/mdpi-logo-black.svg)![MDPI](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=70,h=56/https://mdpi-res.com/data/mdpi-logo-black.svg)](https://www.mdpi.com/) - Journals - [All Journals](https://www.mdpi.com/about/journals) - [Journal Finder](https://www.mdpi.com/about/journalfinder) - [Proceedings Series](https://www.mdpi.com/about/proceedings) - [Propose a Journal](https://www.mdpi.com/about/journals/proposal) - Topics Our Topics - [All Topics](https://www.mdpi.com/topics) - [About Topics](https://www.mdpi.com/topics/about) - [Topics Awards](https://www.mdpi.com/topics/award) - [Subject Editors](https://www.mdpi.com/topics/editors) - [Propose a Topic](https://www.mdpi.com/topics/proposal) By Subjects - [Biology & Life Sciences](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wBGQsc0lDcmgIQgHtyuBzAJ4ACAGRCAMhABmGIQGUsEDADssGfAF8AukA) - [Chemistry & Materials](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wBmQsc0lDcmgYQAsMBbCBHACcAngAIAZKICypHBkEQKCUQGUsEDADss1AL4BdIA) - [Computer Science & Mathematics](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wAWQsc0lDcmgYQHsBbAByRwYATgAIAylggYAdlgwiAZCICypHAAsM3NRCz4AvgF0gA) - [Engineering](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wBWQsc0lDcmgUQDsBzCTjDACc%2B3MAF8AukA) - [Environmental & Earth Sciences](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wA2Qsc0lDcmgUQDtiIAnAe04BbDJxwUABADIJ7UrxwALCQGUsEUVgz4AvgF0gA) - [Medicine & Pharmacology](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wB2Qsc0lDcmgWQygiwgDsMAAgBkggAoALUgCcAtqSwB7cooDmATzABfALpA) - [Public Health & Healthcare](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wBGABkLHNJQ3JoAVVyIsACABIYKOABb8AZEJHlxWUgCdqAXwC6QA) - [Social Sciences, Arts & Humanities](https://www.mdpi.com/topics?facets=NobwRAlgJmBcYGcCuAjAVgUwMYBcFgBowA3AQwBskM4wBOQsc0lDcmgZQHssIKACdjwwA7LBgQE%2BAQQBOePqWFQ%2BACSQBbRRBwRxYAL4BdIA) - [Author Services](https://www.mdpi.com/authors/english) - Information General Content - [Publishing Services](https://www.mdpi.com/publishing_services) - [Open Access Policy](https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess) - [Editorial Process](https://www.mdpi.com/editorial_process) - [Publication Ethics](https://www.mdpi.com/ethics) - [Special Issues Guidelines](https://www.mdpi.com/special_issues_guidelines) - [Article Processing Charge](https://www.mdpi.com/apc) Guidelines - [For Authors](https://www.mdpi.com/authors) - [For Reviewers](https://www.mdpi.com/reviewers) - [For Editors](https://www.mdpi.com/editors) - [For Librarians](https://www.mdpi.com/librarians) Partnerships - [Societies](https://www.mdpi.com/societies) - [Conferences](https://www.mdpi.com/partnerships/conferences) - [Institutional Open Access Program](https://www.mdpi.com/ioap) - About Company - [About Us](https://www.mdpi.com/about) - [Mission](https://www.mdpi.com/about/mission) - [Impact](https://www.mdpi.com/about/impact) - [History](https://www.mdpi.com/about/history) - [Leadership](https://www.mdpi.com/about/leadership) - [Office Locations](https://www.mdpi.com/about/office-locations) - [Careers](https://careers.mdpi.com/) - [Awards](https://www.mdpi.com/awards) - [Products](https://www.mdpi.com/about/products) - [Accessibility](https://www.mdpi.com/accessibility) Media - [News](https://www.mdpi.com/news) - [Blog](https://blog.mdpi.com/) Contact - [Support](https://www.mdpi.com/support) - [Send Feedback](https://www.mdpi.com/support/feedback) Sign in [Submit](https://susy.mdpi.com/user/manuscripts/upload) Open mobile navigation 1. [Home](https://www.mdpi.com/) 2. [Journals](https://www.mdpi.com/about/journals) 3. [JCM](https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcm) 4. [Volume 10](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10) 5. [Issue 16](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16) 6. [10\.3390/jcm10163493](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493) [![](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=32,h=32/https://mdpi-res.com/img/journals/jcm-logo-sq.png?a3a9757d9587fc12)JCMJournal of Clinical Medicine](https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcm) Get Alerted Get Alerted Open Cite Cite Open Share Share [Download PDF PDF](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493/pdf) More formats [Abstract](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Abstract)[Introduction](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Introduction)[Methods](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Methods)[Results](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Results)[Discussion](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Discussion)[Conclusions](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Conclusions)[Supplementary Materials](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Supplementary_Materials)[Author Contributions](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Author_Contributions)[Funding](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Funding)[Institutional Review Board Statement](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Institutional_Review_Board_Statement)[Informed Consent Statement](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Informed_Consent_Statement)[Data Availability Statement](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Data_Availability_Statement)[Conflicts of Interest](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Conflicts_of_Interest)[References](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#References)[Article Metrics](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#Article_Metrics) - Article - ![Open Access](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=14,h=14/https://mdpi-res.com/data/open-access.svg) 7 August 2021 # Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Test Kits for Detecting SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 17,171 Suspected COVID-19 Patients Shahad Saif Khandker1,† , Nik Haszroel Hysham Nik Hashim2,3,† , Zakuan Zainy Deris2,3 , Rafidah Hanim Shueb2,\* and Md Asiful Islam4,\* 1 Gonoshasthaya-RNA Molecular Diagnostic and Research Center, Dhanmondi, Dhaka 1205, Bangladesh 2 Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia 3 Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia 4 Department of Haematology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia Show more [J. Clin. Med.](https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcm)**2021**, *10*(16), 3493;<https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10163493> This article belongs to the Special Issue [New Diagnostic Assays for COVID-19](https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcm/special_issues/Diagnostic_Assays_COVID-19) [Version Notes](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493/notes) [Order Reprints](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493/reprints) Article Metrics Altmetrics [![Article has an altmetric score of 16](https://badges.altmetric.com/?size=128&score=16&types=rrttttwd)](https://www.altmetric.com/details.php?domain=www.mdpi.com&citation_id=111591942) [Citations94](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#article-metrics-citations) [Article Views13220](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#article-metrics-statistics-views) Academic Editors BTBahi Takkouche Bahi Takkouche GSGiuseppe Signoriello Giuseppe Signoriello Publication History - Received: 6 June 2021 - Revised: 4 August 2021 - Accepted: 5 August 2021 - Published: 7 August 2021 Article Figures (5) ![PRISMA flow diagram of study selection.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g001-550.jpg?1628406526)![Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g002-550.jpg?1628406526)![Forest plots representing estimating of (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003a-550.jpg?1628406526)![Forest plots representing estimating of (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003b-550.jpg?1628406526)![Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g004-550.jpg?1628406526) Article Figures (5) ![PRISMA flow diagram of study selection.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g001-550.jpg?1628406526)![Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g002-550.jpg?1628406526)![Forest plots representing estimating of (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003a-550.jpg?1628406526)![Forest plots representing estimating of (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003b-550.jpg?1628406526)![Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating (A) specificity and (B) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19.](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g004-550.jpg?1628406526) Supplementary Material ZIP-Document (ZIP, 4434 KB) Related Articles [Performance of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis](https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/1/110) Muhammad Fazli Khalid et al. Diagnostics, 4 January 2022 [Update on Rapid Diagnostics for COVID-19: A Systematic Review](https://www.mdpi.com/2673-8937/2/2/23) Bruna de Paula Dias et al. IJTM, 17 June 2022 [A Performance Assessment Study of Different Clinical Samples for Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Diagnosis Tests](https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/4/847) Naveed Ahmed et al. Diagnostics, 29 March 2022 ## Abstract Early diagnosis is still as crucial as the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. As RT-PCR sometimes is not feasible in developing nations or rural areas, health professionals may use a rapid antigen test (RAT) to lessen the load of diagnosis. However, the efficacy of RAT is yet to be investigated thoroughly. Hence, we tried to evaluate the overall performance of RAT in SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Based on our PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42021231432), we searched online databases (i.e., PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science) and analysed overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT along with study quality, publication bias, heterogeneity and more. The overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT were detected as 99.4% (95% CI: 99.1–99.8; I2 = 90%) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.8–75.9; I2 = 98%), respectively. In subgroup analyses, nasopharyngeal specimens and symptomatic patient’s samples were more sensitive in RAT, while cycle threshold (Ct) values were found to have an inverse relationship with sensitivity. In the European and American populations, RAT showed better performance. Although the sensitivity of RAT is yet to be improved, it could still be an alternative in places with poor laboratory set up. Nevertheless, the negative samples of RAT can be re-tested using RT-PCR to reduce false negative results. Keywords: [COVID-19](https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=COVID-19); [SARS-CoV-2](https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=SARS-CoV-2); [rapid antigen test](https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=rapid+antigen+test); [specificity](https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=specificity); [sensitivity](https://www.mdpi.com/search?q=sensitivity) ## 1\. Introduction Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), characterised mainly by fever, cough, sore throat, fatigue, joint and muscle pain and loss of smell and taste \[1,2,3,4,5\]. It was first identified in Hubei province in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and until now, it continues to be a significant health issue worldwide. Because there is no specific therapy or medication, early and accurate diagnosis is critical in preventing the spread of the disease \[6,7\]. In vitro diagnostics have long been recognised as a valuable tool for outbreak control and patient care \[8\]. The current gold standard diagnostic test for laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT); reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to be specific \[9\]. The advantage this has over other tests is its high sensitivity due to the nucleic acid amplification step while also having a high specificity due to the specific primers used. This is consistent with its purpose at referral centres, which is to advise clinical care of patients. However, since it can take several hours to obtain results from RT-PCR, it may be inappropriate to use during an emergency. It also requires costly technology and competent workers, both of which may not be accessible in remote health clinics, particularly in underdeveloped countries. Rapid antigen test (RAT) kits have emerged as an important alternative tool to aid in the clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. RAT is based on immunochromatography, which employs antibodies spotted onto nitrocellulose membranes that interact with specific antigens from the patient sample. The antigen–antibody interaction can be visualised manually or by using an immunofluorescence machine reader. For the diagnosis of COVID-19, the target analyte is often the virus’ nucleocapsid protein. A similar strategy has been used for the rapid diagnosis of HIV, malaria, influenza and other diseases \[9\]. It is a reasonably inexpensive and simple test with quick results that may be used for point-of-care testing \[10\]. The advantage of RAT is that the test is more accessible to patients. It also enables appropriate infection control measures to be instituted earlier which is important in a pandemic \[10,11\]. However, a negative RAT result cannot rule out COVID-19 infection \[12\]. Patients with typical clinical presentation or close contacts of COVID-19 cases should undergo repeat testing \[12,13\]. For diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, the World Health Organisation has recommended that a RAT kit needs to meet a minimum performance requirement of at least 80% sensitivity and 97% specificity compared with a NAAT reference assay to be used \[14\]. Studies regarding the diagnostic accuracy of RAT have produced a wide range of sensitivity. The varied results may be due to the various study designs, manufacturer of the RAT kits, patient selection, types of specimens and the phase of illness at the point of sample collection. While research and development of RAT to detect SARS-CoV-2 continue, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide an update on the diagnostic accuracy in terms of estimating the specificity and sensitivity of RAT kits in patients with suspected COVID-19. ## 2\. Methods #### 2\.1. Study Protocol and Guideline Based on the current literature, this systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic accuracy of the available RAT kits for COVID-19 diagnosis was undertaken according to the PRISMA guideline \[15\]. The protocol of this study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021231432). #### 2\.2. Eligibility Criteria As the objective was to investigate the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the available RAT kits detecting SARS-CoV-2, we included studies in which RAT kits were used to identify SARS-CoV-2 to confirm COVID-19. Original studies without restricting study design or language were included. Review articles, opinions, case reports, news, press releases, blogs and data from websites were not considered eligible. #### 2\.3. Search Strategies Based on the eligibility criteria, we searched online databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify studies of our interest published between 1 January 2020 and 13 January 2021. The following keywords were used to search different databases: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus, nCoV, antigen, detection, diagnostic, diagnosis, test, testing, assay, assays and combined with appropriate Boolean operators ([Table S1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). Additionally, the reference lists of the included studies were also reviewed to identify any potentially eligible studies. EndNote X8 software (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used to identify and exclude duplicate studies. #### 2\.4. Study Selection Three authors (S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.) independently screened the original pool of papers, then assessed their eligibility to be included in this meta-analysis using title, abstract, and full-text evaluation. Disagreements about whether a study should be included or excluded were discussed with the other authors (M.A.I. and Z.Z.D.) and resolved with acceptable consensus. #### 2\.5. Data Extraction Three authors (S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.) independently undertook the data extraction, and two authors (M.A.I. and Z.Z.D.) validated it. Initially, the data of the total number of positive and negative specimens confirmed by a reference standard followed by the number of positive and negative results of those same specimens were evaluated through RAT kits and they were extracted from each of the eligible studies. The major characteristics of the studies including the Study ID (last name of the first author and year of publication), location, total number of subjects, percentage of female subjects, the mean or median age of the participants, type of participants, specimen types, the test method of RAT kit used, percentages of positive samples detected by the reference standard (RT-PCR), ranges of Ct values of the reference standard and the manufacturer of the RAT kits were documented. #### 2\.6. Quality Assessment Two authors (S.S.K. and M.A.I.) independently assessed the quality of the included studies following the diagnostic test accuracy quality assessment tool of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). To resolve the discrepancies, all authors took part in the discussion and resolved with consensus. If the total score was ≀49, 50–69, or ≄70%, the studies were classed as low-quality (high-risk of bias), moderate-quality (moderate-risk of bias), or high-quality (low risk of bias) \[16\]. To detect publication bias, funnel plots were constructed, and the Egger’s test was performed. #### 2\.7. Data Analyses A random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was used to analyse the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of the RAT kit to detect COVID-19. I2 statistics were used to analyse heterogeneity among the included studies (I2 \> 75% indicating substantial heterogeneity), followed by Cochran’s Q test to determine the significance of the heterogeneity (p \< 0.05 was considered statistically significant). Furthermore, a Galbraith plot was generated to determine the outlier studies. #### 2\.8. Subgroup and Sensitivity Analyses Subgroup analyses were undertaken to investigate sensitivity and specificity based on symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, days of symptom onset, types of specimen, Ct values, countries, continents and manufacturers of RAT. To investigate the robustness of results and the possible source of heterogeneity, sensitivity analyses were performed through strategies such as excluding small studies (\<100), excluding low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model, and excluding outlier studies. The analyses and plots were constructed by using the metaprop codes in the meta (version 4.15-1) and metafor (version 2.4-0) packages of R (version 3.6.3) in RStudio (RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA, USA) (version 1.3.1093). ## 3\. Results #### 3\.1. Study Selection Primarily, based on the search strategies, a total of 1201 published articles were identified from the online databases. During the initial screening process, 872 articles including review articles (n = 31), case reports (n = 7), articles that included non-human subjects (n = 18), editorials, letters and comment (n = 65) and duplicate studies (n = 751) were excluded. From the remaining 329 studies, 300 studies did not comply with the objective of this meta-analysis (irrelevant to the objective of the meta-analysis, repetitive studies, protocols only or missing data of interest); hence regarded as ineligible. The remaining 29 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were finally included in this meta-analysis ([Figure 1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f001)). ![](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g001-550.jpg) **Figure 1.** PRISMA flow diagram of study selection. #### 3\.2. Characteristics of the Included Studies A total of 17,171 COVID-19 suspects, including RT-PCR-positive and negative participants who were further tested in RAT, were reported in this meta-analysis. Different types of specimen (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, nasal swab, sputum, throat swab or endotracheal aspirates) were taken from suspected symptomatic or asymptomatic participants. The RT-PCR-positive participants had a wide range of Ct values. Although a total of 15 different RAT kits were assessed from 13 different manufacturers, the RAT test methods were based on either immunochromatographic (ICG) assay or fluorescence immunoassay (FIA). The studies were carried out in several countries encompassing five continents. [Table 1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t001) shows the detailed features of the studies we included. ![](https://mdpi-res.com/data/table.png) **Table 1.** Major characteristics of the included studies. #### 3\.3. Quality Assessment and Publication Bias The quality of each of the included studies was extensively examined using the JBI diagnostic accuracy checklist where the highest and lowest quality scores of the included studies were recorded as 88.8% (five studies) and 55.5% (two studies), respectively. Overall, there were no low-quality studies, 26.6% of high-quality, and 72.4% of moderate-quality studies ([Table S2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). There was no indication of substantial publication bias in the funnel plots evaluating the specificity and sensitivity of RAT kits to confirm SARS-CoV-2 ([Figure 2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f002)). ![](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g002-550.jpg) **Figure 2.** Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. #### 3\.4. Meta-Analysis The overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT were 99.4% (95% CI: 99.1–99.8; I2 = 90%) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.8–75.9; I2 = 98%), respectively ([Figure 3](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f003)). Four outlier studies \[20,33,38,44\] were identified using the Galbraith plot ([Figure 4](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f004)). Except for the pooled specificity of subgroups based on specimen types (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab: 71.0% (95% CI: 14.1–100.1) and saliva: 80.7% (95% CI: 41.8–100.0)), the specificity did not vary in most of the subgroups and ranged between 99 and 100% ([Table 2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t002) and [Figure S1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). On the other hand, in subgroup analyses, the sensitivity for each subgroup was lower than the specificity. Each of the subgroups estimating the sensitivity had high levels of heterogeneity except for the subgroups defined by the onset of symptoms (\<5 and \>5 days; I2 = 0%) and Ct values (Ct values ≀20 and 36–40; I2 = 0%). When compared with asymptomatic patients (54.5%), the sensitivity of RAT kits was higher in symptomatic patients (78.5%). The sensitivity of the nasopharyngeal swab was higher (70.1%) than that of saliva (50.4%) and throat swab or saliva (38.4%). The CT indicates the number of cycles needed for the fluorescence signals to reach the threshold. Ct value for a particular gene (i.e., N, ORF, E, S or M) is inversely correlated with viral load in a targeted specimen \[45,46\]. Surprisingly, the sensitivity of RAT kits was shown to have an inverse relationship with the Ct values, which also corresponded with the sensitivity of subgroups based on the symptom onset days ([Table 2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t002) and [Figure S1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). The sensitivity of RAT kits dropped to 15.1% and 16.5% when Ct values were 31–35 and 36–40, respectively. On the other hand, the RAT kits had a lower sensitivity when used in the African (56.4%) and Asian (65.0%) populations compared with the European (70.0%) and American populations (74.1%). Kits from different manufacturers exhibited various sensitivity. PanbioTM showed the highest sensitivity (75.1%) followed by Abbott BinaxNOWℱ (74.8%), Standardℱ (66.4%) and Biocredit (42.7%). ![](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003a-550.jpg)![](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003b-550.jpg) **Figure 3.** Forest plots representing estimating of (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. ![](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g004-550.jpg) **Figure 4.** Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. ![](https://mdpi-res.com/data/table.png) **Table 2.** Pooled specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection using the rapid antigen test kit. #### 3\.5. Sensitivity Analyses To assess the range in outcomes, sensitivity analyses were performed removing small studies (n \< 100), low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model instead of a random-effects model, and omitting outlier studies. Surprisingly, the specificity of RAT kits for each of the sensitivity analysis results remained very constant when compared to the total pooled specificity (99.4%), ranging from 99.4% to 99.9% ([Table 3](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t003) and [Figure S2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). Using a fixed-effects model, the overall pooled sensitivity was enhanced to 79.9% as compared with the overall pooled sensitivity observed using the random-effects model (68.4%). However, when small (n \< 100) studies, low- and moderate-quality studies, and outlier studies were excluded, the sensitivity of RAT kits was found to be 62.0%, 69.8%, and 71.2%, respectively, which was close to the overall pooled sensitivity (68.4%) ([Table 3](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t003) and [Figure S2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). ![](https://mdpi-res.com/data/table.png) **Table 3.** Sensitivity analyses. ## 4\. Discussion RT-PCR has been recognised as the diagnostic gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis to date; however, it has several drawbacks, including false-negative and false-positive findings \[47,48\]. The rate of false-negative results was estimated to be about 67% in the first 4–5 days following the onset of symptoms. \[48\]. On the other hand, the reasons behind the false-positive results were contamination during specimen collection, contamination of reagents, PCR amplicons, cross-contamination of the sample, and cross-reaction with other genetic materials or viruses \[47\]. Even in a cohort study, chest CT was found to be more sensitive (88%) as compared with the diagnostic result of RT-PCR (59%) \[49\]. Additionally, RT-PCR is costly and requires well-equipped laboratories \[47,48,50\]. More importantly, the release of RT-PCR results in many instances may take longer than expected due to high sample volumes and a lack of technical support, leading to delayed management of patients and control of outbreaks. As a result, an emphasis on developing RAT kits was necessary to close the diagnostic gaps. So far, several RAT kits have been developed by various manufacturers from multiple countries and evaluated independently by researchers. We observed that most of the RATs were developed based on either ICG assay or FIA. Although both the assays are generally based on the antibody–antigen interaction technique, for the detection, a signal generator (i.e., gold colloid) is used in ICG whereas a fluorescent molecule is bound to the detection antibody in FIA \[51,52,53\]. In this meta-analysis, we looked at the overall sensitivity and specificity of the available reported RAT kits. We found that although the overall pooled specificity (99.4%) was acceptable, the overall pooled sensitivity (68.4%) was not. Except in a few subgroups where there was a lot of heterogeneity across the studies, overall, the specificity did not differ substantially in the subgroup analysis. The study results, on the other hand, differed considerably when it came to assessing the sensitivity. Interestingly, the sensitivity of RAT kits for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients was 78.5% and 54.5%, respectively, indicating that RAT kits can identify both kinds of patient, albeit at a lower detection rate in the latter patient group. However, early detection is critical for RAT, as the sensitivity maintained at 82.0% when the symptom onset came after less than 5 days but dropped to 75.1% after five days. In the case of RT-PCR, a similar association between days of symptom onset and correct diagnosis had been reported \[48\]. This correlation was further justified when we analysed the correlation between Ct values and sensitivity. Previously, an analogous observation was investigated where a negative correlation of Ct values of RT-PCR and sensitivity in just one antigen kit for a specimen was identified \[54\]. When we checked the overall scenario with the studies we included, we found a similar inverse correlation of Ct values and sensitivity. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the higher Ct value (\>33) can be considered as a non-contagious stage \[55\] which can justify the usage of RAT kits. However, early diagnosis using RAT kits can be suggested according to these observations. Again, among different specimen types, the nasopharyngeal swab was identified to be the best for SARS-CoV-2 identification using RAT kits. A recent study also suggested that the nasopharyngeal swab is more sensitive (89%) as compared with saliva (72%) to detect SARS-CoV-2 which confirms our findings \[56\]. In the current study, when the RAT sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2 in people from various continents and nations was examined, it was demonstrated that the sensitivity of RAT in the population of Europe and America was higher as compared to that of Asia and Africa. Because most RAT kits are manufactured in European countries, China, and Korea, the sensitivity may have diminished in Asia and Africa owing to issues during RAT kit transportation. As reported earlier, a repetitive freeze-thaw process during transportation can change the behaviour of proteins used in RAT kits \[57\]. This was further justified when a study by Gupta et al. \[26\] from India exhibited a much higher sensitivity (81.8% (95% CI: 73.2–90.4)) and the RAT kit used in this study was in fact manufactured in India. Hence, based on our findings, it can be suggested that local manufacturers or inventors should be prioritised for the RAT kit development and utilisation. Further investigations are required to determine the correlation of different sample conditions such as transportation or storage with the sensitivity of RAT. Again, recent reports about different genetic and structural mutations of SARS-CoV-2 enhance the possibility to hamper the sensitivity of diagnostic tools \[58,59\]. Hence, researchers need to focus on the improvement of sensitivity of RAT without compromising the specificity to detect both the original and mutated variants of SARS-CoV-2. Results of this meta-analysis support the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19 that the sensitivity of RAT kits is highly correlated with viral load, symptoms, and the timing of the test in relation to the onset of symptoms \[60\]. This meta-analysis also shows that the sensitivity of RAT kits differs depending on the manufacturer and the country in which the kits are produced. ## 5\. Conclusions To summarise, the use of RAT kits is largely recommended for the early detection of patients suspected of having COVID-19, particularly in densely populated and isolated locations with limited resources and laboratory equipment. It may also be useful for prompt diagnosis in central city or rural areas. However, the negative RAT samples may need to be further analysed using molecular tests to confirm the results, particularly when the symptoms of COVID-19 are present. ## Supplementary Materials The following are available online at <https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm10163493/s1>, Table S1: Search strategies, Table S2: Quality assessment of the included studies, Figure S1: Subgroup analyses based on the presence of symptoms, symptom onset, specimen types, Ct values, continents, countries, and kit manufacturers estimating the pooled specificity (A-AA) and sensitivity (AB-BJ) using rapid antigen test kit to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, Figure S2: Sensitivity analyses excluding small studies (\<100), excluding low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model, and excluding outlier studies estimating polled specificity (A–D) and sensitivity (E–H) using a rapid antigen test kit to diagnose SARS-CoV-2. ## Author Contributions Conceptualization, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; methodology, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.; software, M.A.I.; validation, R.H.S., and M.A.I.; formal analysis, M.A.I.; investigation, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.; resources, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I.; data curation, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S.K. and N.H.H.N.H.; writing—review and editing, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; visualization, R.H.S.; supervision, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I.; project administration, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; funding acquisition, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. ## Funding This research was funded by the Universiti Sains Malaysia Research University Grant 1001/PPSP/8012382. ## Institutional Review Board Statement Not applicable. ## Informed Consent Statement Not applicable. ## Data Availability Statement The data presented in this study are available in the main text and [supplementary materials](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493). ## Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. ## References 1. Islam, M.A.; Kundu, S.; Alam, S.S.; Hossan, T.; Kamal, M.A.; Hassan, R. Prevalence and characteristics of fever in adult and paediatric patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis of 17515 patients. PLoS ONE **2021**, 16, e0249788. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+and+characteristics+of+fever+in+adult+and+paediatric+patients+with+coronavirus+disease+2019+\(COVID-19\):+A+systematic+review+and+meta-analysis+of+17515+patients&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Kundu,+S.&author=Alam,+S.S.&author=Hossan,+T.&author=Kamal,+M.A.&author=Hassan,+R.&publication_year=2021&journal=PLoS+ONE&volume=16&pages=e0249788&doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0249788)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249788)\] 2. Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Abdullah, B. Prevalence of Olfactory Dysfunction in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Meta-analysis of 27,492 Patients. Laryngoscope **2021**, 131, 865–878. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+of+Olfactory+Dysfunction+in+Coronavirus+Disease+2019+\(COVID-19\):+A+Meta-analysis+of+27,492+Patients&author=Saniasiaya,+J.&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Abdullah,+B.&publication_year=2021&journal=Laryngoscope&volume=131&pages=865%E2%80%93878&doi=10.1002/lary.29286)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1002/lary.29286)\] 3. Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Abdullah, B. Prevalence and Characteristics of Taste Disorders in Cases of COVID-19: A Meta-analysis of 29,349 Patients. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. **2020**, 165, 33–42. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+and+Characteristics+of+Taste+Disorders+in+Cases+of+COVID-19:+A+Meta-analysis+of+29,349+Patients&author=Saniasiaya,+J.&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Abdullah,+B.&publication_year=2020&journal=Otolaryngol.+Head+Neck+Surg.&volume=165&pages=33%E2%80%9342&doi=10.1177/0194599820981018&pmid=33320033)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1177/0194599820981018)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33320033)\] 4. Islam, M.A.; Alam, S.S.; Kundu, S.; Hossan, T.; Kamal, M.A.; Cavestro, C. Prevalence of Headache in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 14,275 Patients. Front. Neurol. **2020**, 11, 562634. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+of+Headache+in+Patients+With+Coronavirus+Disease+2019+\(COVID-19\):+A+Systematic+Review+and+Meta-Analysis+of+14,275+Patients&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Alam,+S.S.&author=Kundu,+S.&author=Hossan,+T.&author=Kamal,+M.A.&author=Cavestro,+C.&publication_year=2020&journal=Front.+Neurol.&volume=11&pages=562634&doi=10.3389/fneur.2020.562634&pmid=33329305)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.562634)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33329305)\] 5. Guan, W.-J.; Ni, Z.-Y.; Hu, Y.; Liang, W.-H.; Ou, C.-Q.; He, J.-X.; Liu, L.; Shan, H.; Lei, C.-L.; Hui, D.S. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N. Engl. J. Med. **2020**, 382, 1708–1720. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Clinical+characteristics+of+coronavirus+disease+2019+in+China&author=Guan,+W.-J.&author=Ni,+Z.-Y.&author=Hu,+Y.&author=Liang,+W.-H.&author=Ou,+C.-Q.&author=He,+J.-X.&author=Liu,+L.&author=Shan,+H.&author=Lei,+C.-L.&author=Hui,+D.S.&publication_year=2020&journal=N.+Engl.+J.+Med.&volume=382&pages=1708%E2%80%931720&doi=10.1056/NEJMoa2002032&pmid=32109013)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32109013)\] 6. Pfefferle, S.; Reucher, S.; Nörz, D.; LĂŒtgehetmann, M. Evaluation of a quantitative RT-PCR assay for the detection of the emerging coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 using a high throughput system. Eurosurveillance **2020**, 25, 2000152. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+quantitative+RT-PCR+assay+for+the+detection+of+the+emerging+coronavirus+SARS-CoV-2+using+a+high+throughput+system&author=Pfefferle,+S.&author=Reucher,+S.&author=N%C3%B6rz,+D.&author=L%C3%BCtgehetmann,+M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Eurosurveillance&volume=25&pages=2000152&doi=10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.9.2000152&pmid=32156329)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.9.2000152)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32156329)\] \[[Green Version](https://www.eurosurveillance.org/deliver/fulltext/eurosurveillance/25/9/eurosurv-25-9-4.pdf?itemId=/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.9.2000152&mimeType=pdf&containerItemId=content/eurosurveillance)\] 7. LeBlanc, J.J.; Gubbay, J.B.; Li, Y.; Needle, R.; Arneson, S.R.; Marcino, D.; Charest, H.; Desnoyers, G.; Dust, K.; Fattouh, R. Real-time PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 detection in Canadian laboratories. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 128, 104433. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Real-time+PCR-based+SARS-CoV-2+detection+in+Canadian+laboratories&author=LeBlanc,+J.J.&author=Gubbay,+J.B.&author=Li,+Y.&author=Needle,+R.&author=Arneson,+S.R.&author=Marcino,+D.&author=Charest,+H.&author=Desnoyers,+G.&author=Dust,+K.&author=Fattouh,+R.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=128&pages=104433&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104433&pmid=32405254)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104433)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32405254)\] 8. US Food and Drug Administration. In Vitro Diagnostics EUAs. Updated January 14. Available online: <https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/vitro-diagnostics-euas> (accessed on 21 April 2021). 9. D’Cruz, R.J.; Currier, A.W.; Sampson, V.B. Laboratory testing methods for novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Front. Cell Dev. Biol. **2020**, 8, 468. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Laboratory+testing+methods+for+novel+severe+acute+respiratory+syndrome-coronavirus-2+\(SARS-CoV-2\)&author=D%E2%80%99Cruz,+R.J.&author=Currier,+A.W.&author=Sampson,+V.B.&publication_year=2020&journal=Front.+Cell+Dev.+Biol.&volume=8&pages=468&doi=10.3389/fcell.2020.00468&pmid=32582718)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2020.00468)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32582718)\] 10. Torres, I.; Poujois, S.; Albert, E.; Álvarez, G.; Colomina, J.; Navarro, D. Point-of-care evaluation of a rapid antigen test (CLINITESTⓇ Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test) for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. J. Infect. **2021**, 82, 11–12. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Point-of-care+evaluation+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+\(CLINITEST%E2%93%87+Rapid+COVID-19+Antigen+Test\)+for+diagnosis+of+SARS-CoV-2+infection+in+symptomatic+and+asymptomatic+individuals&author=Torres,+I.&author=Poujois,+S.&author=Albert,+E.&author=%C3%81lvarez,+G.&author=Colomina,+J.&author=Navarro,+D.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=11%E2%80%9312&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2021.02.010&pmid=33587922)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2021.02.010)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33587922)\] 11. Peeling, R.W.; Olliaro, P.L.; Boeras, D.I.; Fongwen, N. Scaling up COVID-19 rapid antigen tests: Promises and challenges. Lancet Infect. Dis. **2021**. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Scaling+up+COVID-19+rapid+antigen+tests:+Promises+and+challenges&author=Peeling,+R.W.&author=Olliaro,+P.L.&author=Boeras,+D.I.&author=Fongwen,+N.&publication_year=2021&journal=Lancet+Infect.+Dis.&doi=10.1016/S1473-3099\(21\)00048-7)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099\(21\)00048-7)\] 12. Albert, E.; Torres, I.; Bueno, F.; Huntley, D.; Molla, E.; FernĂĄndez-Fuentes, M.Á.; MartĂ­nez, M.; Poujois, S.; ForquĂ©, L.; Valdivia, A. Field evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for COVID-19 diagnosis in primary healthcare centres. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2020**, 27, 7–10. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Field+evaluation+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+\(Panbio%E2%84%A2+COVID-19+Ag+Rapid+Test+Device\)+for+COVID-19+diagnosis+in+primary+healthcare+centres&author=Albert,+E.&author=Torres,+I.&author=Bueno,+F.&author=Huntley,+D.&author=Molla,+E.&author=Fern%C3%A1ndez-Fuentes,+M.%C3%81.&author=Mart%C3%ADnez,+M.&author=Poujois,+S.&author=Forqu%C3%A9,+L.&author=Valdivia,+A.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=7%E2%80%9310&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.11.004)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.11.004)\] 13. Mina, M.J.; Parker, R.; Larremore, D.B. Rethinking Covid-19 test sensitivity—A strategy for containment. N. Engl. J. Med. **2020**, 383, e120. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rethinking+Covid-19+test+sensitivity%E2%80%94A+strategy+for+containment&author=Mina,+M.J.&author=Parker,+R.&author=Larremore,+D.B.&publication_year=2020&journal=N.+Engl.+J.+Med.&volume=383&pages=e120&doi=10.1056/NEJMp2025631)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2025631)\] 14. World Health Organization. Antigen-Detection in the Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Rapid Immunoassays: Interim Guidance. 11 September 2020. Available online: <https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/antigen-detection-in-the-diagnosis-of-sars-cov-2infection-using-rapid-immunoassays> (accessed on 28 April 2021). 15. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Group, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. **2009**, 6, e1000097. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Preferred+reporting+items+for+systematic+reviews+and+meta-analyses:+The+PRISMA+statement&author=Moher,+D.&author=Liberati,+A.&author=Tetzlaff,+J.&author=Altman,+D.G.&author=Group,+P.&publication_year=2009&journal=PLoS+Med.&volume=6&pages=e1000097&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097)\] \[[Green Version](https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097&type=printable)\] 16. Chia, Y.C.; Islam, M.A.; Hider, P.; Woon, P.Y.; Johan, M.F.; Hassan, R.; Ramli, M. The Prevalence of TET2 Gene Mutations in Patients with BCR-ABL-Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers **2021**, 13, 3078. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The+Prevalence+of+TET2+Gene+Mutations+in+Patients+with+BCR-ABL-Negative+Myeloproliferative+Neoplasms+\(MPN\):+A+Systematic+Review+and+Meta-Analysis&author=Chia,+Y.C.&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Hider,+P.&author=Woon,+P.Y.&author=Johan,+M.F.&author=Hassan,+R.&author=Ramli,+M.&publication_year=2021&journal=Cancers&volume=13&pages=3078&doi=10.3390/cancers13123078)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13123078)\] 17. Abdelrazik, A.M.; Elshafie, S.M.; Abdelaziz, H.M. Potential Use of Antigen-Based Rapid Test for SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Specimens in Low-Resource Settings in Egypt for Symptomatic Patients and High-Risk Contacts. Lab. Med. **2020**, 52, 46–49. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Potential+Use+of+Antigen-Based+Rapid+Test+for+SARS-CoV-2+in+Respiratory+Specimens+in+Low-Resource+Settings+in+Egypt+for+Symptomatic+Patients+and+High-Risk+Contacts&author=Abdelrazik,+A.M.&author=Elshafie,+S.M.&author=Abdelaziz,+H.M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Lab.+Med.&volume=52&pages=46%E2%80%9349&doi=10.1093/labmed/lmaa104&pmid=33283230)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmaa104)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33283230)\] 18. AgullĂł, V.; FernĂĄndez-GonzĂĄlez, M.; de la Tabla, V.O.; Gonzalo-JimĂ©nez, N.; GarcĂ­a, J.A.; MasiĂĄ, M.; GutiĂ©rrez, F. Evaluation of the rapid antigen test Panbio COVID-19 in saliva and nasal swabs in a population-based point-of-care study. J. Infect. **2020**, 82, 186–230. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+the+rapid+antigen+test+Panbio+COVID-19+in+saliva+and+nasal+swabs+in+a+population-based+point-of-care+study&author=Agull%C3%B3,+V.&author=Fern%C3%A1ndez-Gonz%C3%A1lez,+M.&author=de+la+Tabla,+V.O.&author=Gonzalo-Jim%C3%A9nez,+N.&author=Garc%C3%ADa,+J.A.&author=Masi%C3%A1,+M.&author=Guti%C3%A9rrez,+F.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=186%E2%80%93230&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.007&pmid=33309541)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.007)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33309541)\] 19. Alemany, A.; Baro, B.; Ouchi, D.; RodĂł, P.; Ubals, M.; Corbacho-MonnĂ©, M.; Vergara-Alert, J.; Rodon, J.; SegalĂ©s, J.; Esteban, C. Analytical and clinical performance of the panbio COVID-19 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test. J. Infect. **2020**, 82, 186–230. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Analytical+and+clinical+performance+of+the+panbio+COVID-19+antigen-detecting+rapid+diagnostic+test&author=Alemany,+A.&author=Baro,+B.&author=Ouchi,+D.&author=Rod%C3%B3,+P.&author=Ubals,+M.&author=Corbacho-Monn%C3%A9,+M.&author=Vergara-Alert,+J.&author=Rodon,+J.&author=Segal%C3%A9s,+J.&author=Esteban,+C.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=186%E2%80%93230&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.033&pmid=33421447)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.033)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33421447)\] 20. Azzi, L.; Baj, A.; Alberio, T.; Lualdi, M.; Veronesi, G.; Carcano, G.; Ageno, W.; Gambarini, C.; Maffioli, L.; Di Saverio, S. Rapid Salivary Test suitable for a mass screening program to detect SARS-CoV-2: A diagnostic accuracy study. J. Infect. **2020**, 81, 75–78. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rapid+Salivary+Test+suitable+for+a+mass+screening+program+to+detect+SARS-CoV-2:+A+diagnostic+accuracy+study&author=Azzi,+L.&author=Baj,+A.&author=Alberio,+T.&author=Lualdi,+M.&author=Veronesi,+G.&author=Carcano,+G.&author=Ageno,+W.&author=Gambarini,+C.&author=Maffioli,+L.&author=Di+Saverio,+S.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=81&pages=75%E2%80%9378&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.06.042&pmid=32579988)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.06.042)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32579988)\] 21. Cerutti, F.; Burdino, E.; Milia, M.G.; Allice, T.; Gregori, G.; Bruzzone, B.; Ghisetti, V. Urgent need of rapid tests for SARS CoV-2 antigen detection: Evaluation of the SD-Biosensor antigen test for SARS-CoV-2. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 132, 104654. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Urgent+need+of+rapid+tests+for+SARS+CoV-2+antigen+detection:+Evaluation+of+the+SD-Biosensor+antigen+test+for+SARS-CoV-2&author=Cerutti,+F.&author=Burdino,+E.&author=Milia,+M.G.&author=Allice,+T.&author=Gregori,+G.&author=Bruzzone,+B.&author=Ghisetti,+V.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=132&pages=104654&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104654&pmid=33053494)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104654)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33053494)\] 22. Chaimayo, C.; Kaewnaphan, B.; Tanlieng, N.; Athipanyasilp, N.; Sirijatuphat, R.; Chayakulkeeree, M.; Angkasekwinai, N.; Sutthent, R.; Puangpunngam, N.; Tharmviboonsri, T. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay in comparison with real-time RT-PCR assay for laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in Thailand. Virol. J. **2020**, 17, 177. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+assay+in+comparison+with+real-time+RT-PCR+assay+for+laboratory+diagnosis+of+COVID-19+in+Thailand&author=Chaimayo,+C.&author=Kaewnaphan,+B.&author=Tanlieng,+N.&author=Athipanyasilp,+N.&author=Sirijatuphat,+R.&author=Chayakulkeeree,+M.&author=Angkasekwinai,+N.&author=Sutthent,+R.&author=Puangpunngam,+N.&author=Tharmviboonsri,+T.&publication_year=2020&journal=Virol.+J.&volume=17&pages=177&doi=10.1186/s12985-020-01452-5)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-020-01452-5)\] 23. Diao, B.; Wen, K.; Zhang, J.; Chen, J.; Han, C.; Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Deng, G.; Zhou, H.; Wu, Y. Accuracy of a nucleocapsid protein antigen rapid test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2020**, 27, 289.e1–289.e4. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Accuracy+of+a+nucleocapsid+protein+antigen+rapid+test+in+the+diagnosis+of+SARS-CoV-2+infection&author=Diao,+B.&author=Wen,+K.&author=Zhang,+J.&author=Chen,+J.&author=Han,+C.&author=Chen,+Y.&author=Wang,+S.&author=Deng,+G.&author=Zhou,+H.&author=Wu,+Y.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=289.e1%E2%80%93289.e4&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.057&pmid=33031947)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.057)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33031947)\] 24. Fenollar, F.; Bouam, A.; Ballouche, M.; Fuster, L.; Prudent, E.; Colson, P.; Tissot-Dupont, H.; Million, M.; Drancourt, M.; Raoult, D. Evaluation of the Panbio Covid-19 rapid antigen detection test device for the screening of patients with COVID-19. J. Clin. Microbiol. **2020**, 59, e02589-20. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+the+Panbio+Covid-19+rapid+antigen+detection+test+device+for+the+screening+of+patients+with+COVID-19&author=Fenollar,+F.&author=Bouam,+A.&author=Ballouche,+M.&author=Fuster,+L.&author=Prudent,+E.&author=Colson,+P.&author=Tissot-Dupont,+H.&author=Million,+M.&author=Drancourt,+M.&author=Raoult,+D.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Microbiol.&volume=59&pages=e02589-20&doi=10.1128/JCM.02589-20)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02589-20)\] 25. Gremmels, H.; Winkel, B.M.; Schuurman, R.; Rosingh, A.; Rigter, N.A.; Rodriguez, O.; Ubijaan, J.; Wensing, A.M.; Bonten, M.J.; Hofstra, L.M. Real-life validation of the Panbioℱ COVID-19 antigen rapid test (Abbott) in community-dwelling subjects with symptoms of potential SARS-CoV-2 infection. EClinicalMedicine **2021**, 31, 100677. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Real-life+validation+of+the+Panbio%E2%84%A2+COVID-19+antigen+rapid+test+\(Abbott\)+in+community-dwelling+subjects+with+symptoms+of+potential+SARS-CoV-2+infection&author=Gremmels,+H.&author=Winkel,+B.M.&author=Schuurman,+R.&author=Rosingh,+A.&author=Rigter,+N.A.&author=Rodriguez,+O.&author=Ubijaan,+J.&author=Wensing,+A.M.&author=Bonten,+M.J.&author=Hofstra,+L.M.&publication_year=2021&journal=EClinicalMedicine&volume=31&pages=100677&doi=10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100677)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100677)\] 26. Gupta, A.; Khurana, S.; Das, R.; Srigyan, D.; Singh, A.; Mittal, A.; Singh, P.; Soneja, M.; Kumar, A.; Singh, A.K. Rapid chromatographic immunoassay-based evaluation of COVID-19: A cross-sectional, diagnostic test accuracy study & its implications for COVID-19 management in India. Indian J. Med. Res. **2020**, 153, 126–131. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rapid+chromatographic+immunoassay-based+evaluation+of+COVID-19:+A+cross-sectional,+diagnostic+test+accuracy+study+%2526+its+implications+for+COVID-19+management+in+India&author=Gupta,+A.&author=Khurana,+S.&author=Das,+R.&author=Srigyan,+D.&author=Singh,+A.&author=Mittal,+A.&author=Singh,+P.&author=Soneja,+M.&author=Kumar,+A.&author=Singh,+A.K.&publication_year=2020&journal=Indian+J.+Med.+Res.&volume=153&pages=126%E2%80%93131&doi=10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_3305_4120)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_3305_4120)\] 27. KrĂŒttgen, A.; Cornelissen, C.G.; Dreher, M.; Hornef, M.W.; Imöhl, M.; Kleines, M. Comparison of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid antigen test to the real star Sars-CoV-2 RT PCR kit. J. Virol. Methods **2021**, 288, 114024. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Comparison+of+the+SARS-CoV-2+Rapid+antigen+test+to+the+real+star+Sars-CoV-2+RT+PCR+kit&author=Kr%C3%BCttgen,+A.&author=Cornelissen,+C.G.&author=Dreher,+M.&author=Hornef,+M.W.&author=Im%C3%B6hl,+M.&author=Kleines,+M.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Virol.+Methods&volume=288&pages=114024&doi=10.1016/j.jviromet.2020.114024&pmid=33227341)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2020.114024)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33227341)\] 28. Linares, M.; PĂ©rez-Tanoira, R.; Carrero, A.; Romanyk, J.; PĂ©rez-GarcĂ­a, F.; GĂłmez-Herruz, P.; Arroyo, T.; Cuadros, J. Panbio antigen rapid test is reliable to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 7 days after the onset of symptoms. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 133, 104659. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Panbio+antigen+rapid+test+is+reliable+to+diagnose+SARS-CoV-2+infection+in+the+first+7+days+after+the+onset+of+symptoms&author=Linares,+M.&author=P%C3%A9rez-Tanoira,+R.&author=Carrero,+A.&author=Romanyk,+J.&author=P%C3%A9rez-Garc%C3%ADa,+F.&author=G%C3%B3mez-Herruz,+P.&author=Arroyo,+T.&author=Cuadros,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=133&pages=104659&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104659)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104659)\] 29. Lindner, A.K.; Nikolai, O.; Kausch, F.; Wintel, M.; Hommes, F.; Gertler, M.; KrĂŒger, L.J.; Gaeddert, M.; Tobian, F.; Lainati, F. Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with self-collected anterior nasal swab versus professional-collected nasopharyngeal swab. Eur. Respir. J. **2020**, 57, 2003961. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Head-to-head+comparison+of+SARS-CoV-2+antigen-detecting+rapid+test+with+self-collected+anterior+nasal+swab+versus+professional-collected+nasopharyngeal+swab&author=Lindner,+A.K.&author=Nikolai,+O.&author=Kausch,+F.&author=Wintel,+M.&author=Hommes,+F.&author=Gertler,+M.&author=Kr%C3%BCger,+L.J.&author=Gaeddert,+M.&author=Tobian,+F.&author=Lainati,+F.&publication_year=2020&journal=Eur.+Respir.+J.&volume=57&pages=2003961&doi=10.1183/13993003.03961-2020&pmid=33303544)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.03961-2020)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33303544)\] 30. Liotti, F.M.; Menchinelli, G.; Lalle, E.; Palucci, I.; Marchetti, S.; Colavita, F.; La Sorda, M.; Sberna, G.; Bordi, L.; Sanguinetti, M. Performance of a novel diagnostic assay for rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in nasopharynx samples. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2020**, 27, 487–488. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Performance+of+a+novel+diagnostic+assay+for+rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+in+nasopharynx+samples&author=Liotti,+F.M.&author=Menchinelli,+G.&author=Lalle,+E.&author=Palucci,+I.&author=Marchetti,+S.&author=Colavita,+F.&author=La+Sorda,+M.&author=Sberna,+G.&author=Bordi,+L.&author=Sanguinetti,+M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=487%E2%80%93488&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.030&pmid=32979567)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.030)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32979567)\] 31. Mak, G.C.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Chow, N.L.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Analytical sensitivity and clinical sensitivity of the three rapid antigen detection kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 133, 104684. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Analytical+sensitivity+and+clinical+sensitivity+of+the+three+rapid+antigen+detection+kits+for+detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+virus&author=Mak,+G.C.&author=Lau,+S.S.&author=Wong,+K.K.&author=Chow,+N.L.&author=Lau,+C.&author=Lam,+E.T.&author=Chan,+R.C.&author=Tsang,+D.N.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=133&pages=104684&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104684)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104684)\] 32. Mak, G.C.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Chow, N.L.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Evaluation of rapid antigen detection kit from the WHO Emergency Use List for detecting SARS-CoV-2. J. Clin. Virol. **2021**, 134, 104712. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+rapid+antigen+detection+kit+from+the+WHO+Emergency+Use+List+for+detecting+SARS-CoV-2&author=Mak,+G.C.&author=Lau,+S.S.&author=Wong,+K.K.&author=Chow,+N.L.&author=Lau,+C.&author=Lam,+E.T.&author=Chan,+R.C.&author=Tsang,+D.N.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=134&pages=104712&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104712)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104712)\] 33. Mak, G.C.; Cheng, P.K.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 129, 104500. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+rapid+antigen+test+for+detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+virus&author=Mak,+G.C.&author=Cheng,+P.K.&author=Lau,+S.S.&author=Wong,+K.K.&author=Lau,+C.&author=Lam,+E.T.&author=Chan,+R.C.&author=Tsang,+D.N.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=129&pages=104500&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104500&pmid=32585619)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104500)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32585619)\] 34. Nalumansi, A.; Lutalo, T.; Kayiwa, J.; Watera, C.; Balinandi, S.; Kiconco, J.; Nakaseegu, J.; Olara, D.; Odwilo, E.; Serwanga, J. Field evaluation of the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test in Uganda using nasopharyngeal samples. Int. J. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 104, 282–286. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Field+evaluation+of+the+performance+of+a+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+rapid+diagnostic+test+in+Uganda+using+nasopharyngeal+samples&author=Nalumansi,+A.&author=Lutalo,+T.&author=Kayiwa,+J.&author=Watera,+C.&author=Balinandi,+S.&author=Kiconco,+J.&author=Nakaseegu,+J.&author=Olara,+D.&author=Odwilo,+E.&author=Serwanga,+J.&publication_year=2021&journal=Int.+J.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=104&pages=282%E2%80%93286&doi=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.073&pmid=33130198)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.073)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33130198)\] 35. Pilarowski, G.; Lebel, P.; Sunshine, S.; Liu, J.; Crawford, E.; Marquez, C.; Rubio, L.; Chamie, G.; Martinez, J.; Peng, J. Performance characteristics of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay at a public plaza testing site in San Francisco. medRxiv **2020**. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Performance+characteristics+of+a+rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+assay+at+a+public+plaza+testing+site+in+San+Francisco&author=Pilarowski,+G.&author=Lebel,+P.&author=Sunshine,+S.&author=Liu,+J.&author=Crawford,+E.&author=Marquez,+C.&author=Rubio,+L.&author=Chamie,+G.&author=Martinez,+J.&author=Peng,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=medRxiv&doi=10.1101/2020.1111.1102.20223891)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1101/2020.1111.1102.20223891)\] 36. Pilarowski, G.; Marquez, C.; Rubio, L.; Peng, J.; Martinez, J.; Black, D.; Chamie, G.; Jones, D.; Jacobo, J.; Tulier-Laiwa, V. Field performance and public health response using the BinaxNOW TM Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay during community-based testing. Clin. Infect. Dis. **2020**. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Field+performance+and+public+health+response+using+the+BinaxNOW+TM+Rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+assay+during+community-based+testing&author=Pilarowski,+G.&author=Marquez,+C.&author=Rubio,+L.&author=Peng,+J.&author=Martinez,+J.&author=Black,+D.&author=Chamie,+G.&author=Jones,+D.&author=Jacobo,+J.&author=Tulier-Laiwa,+V.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Infect.+Dis.&doi=10.1093/cid/ciaa1890&pmid=33367619)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1890)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33367619)\] 37. Porte, L.; Legarraga, P.; Vollrath, V.; Aguilera, X.; Munita, J.M.; Araos, R.; Pizarro, G.; Vial, P.; Iruretagoyena, M.; Dittrich, S. Evaluation of a novel antigen-based rapid detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples. Int. J. Infect. Dis. **2020**, 99, 328–333. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+novel+antigen-based+rapid+detection+test+for+the+diagnosis+of+SARS-CoV-2+in+respiratory+samples&author=Porte,+L.&author=Legarraga,+P.&author=Vollrath,+V.&author=Aguilera,+X.&author=Munita,+J.M.&author=Araos,+R.&author=Pizarro,+G.&author=Vial,+P.&author=Iruretagoyena,+M.&author=Dittrich,+S.&publication_year=2020&journal=Int.+J.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=99&pages=328%E2%80%93333&doi=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.098&pmid=32497809)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.098)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32497809)\] 38. Scohy, A.; Anantharajah, A.; BodĂ©us, M.; Kabamba-Mukadi, B.; Verroken, A.; Rodriguez-Villalobos, H. Low performance of rapid antigen detection test as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosis. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 129, 104455. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Low+performance+of+rapid+antigen+detection+test+as+frontline+testing+for+COVID-19+diagnosis&author=Scohy,+A.&author=Anantharajah,+A.&author=Bod%C3%A9us,+M.&author=Kabamba-Mukadi,+B.&author=Verroken,+A.&author=Rodriguez-Villalobos,+H.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=129&pages=104455&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104455&pmid=32485618)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104455)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32485618)\] 39. Strömer, A.; Rose, R.; SchĂ€fer, M.; Schön, F.; Vollersen, A.; Lorentz, T.; Fickenscher, H.; Krumbholz, A. Performance of a Point-of-Care Test for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen. Microorganisms **2021**, 9, 58. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Performance+of+a+Point-of-Care+Test+for+the+Rapid+Detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+Antigen&author=Str%C3%B6mer,+A.&author=Rose,+R.&author=Sch%C3%A4fer,+M.&author=Sch%C3%B6n,+F.&author=Vollersen,+A.&author=Lorentz,+T.&author=Fickenscher,+H.&author=Krumbholz,+A.&publication_year=2021&journal=Microorganisms&volume=9&pages=58&doi=10.3390/microorganisms9010058&pmid=33379279)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9010058)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33379279)\] 40. Toptan, T.; Eckermann, L.; Pfeiffer, A.E.; Hoehl, S.; Ciesek, S.; Drosten, C.; Corman, V.M. Evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: Potential to help reduce community spread? J. Clin. Virol. **2021**, 135, 104713. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+SARS-CoV-2+rapid+antigen+test:+Potential+to+help+reduce+community+spread?&author=Toptan,+T.&author=Eckermann,+L.&author=Pfeiffer,+A.E.&author=Hoehl,+S.&author=Ciesek,+S.&author=Drosten,+C.&author=Corman,+V.M.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=135&pages=104713&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104713)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104713)\] 41. Torres, I.; Poujois, S.; Albert, E.; Colomina, J.; Navarro, D. Evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device) for SARS-CoV-2 detection in asymptomatic close contacts of COVID-19 patients. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2021**, 27, 636.e1–636.e4. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+\(Panbio%E2%84%A2+COVID-19+Ag+rapid+test+device\)+for+SARS-CoV-2+detection+in+asymptomatic+close+contacts+of+COVID-19+patients&author=Torres,+I.&author=Poujois,+S.&author=Albert,+E.&author=Colomina,+J.&author=Navarro,+D.&publication_year=2021&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=636.e1%E2%80%93636.e4&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.12.022)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.12.022)\] 42. Turcato, G.; Zaboli, A.; Pfeifer, N.; Ciccariello, L.; Sibilio, S.; Tezza, G.; Ausserhofer, D. Clinical application of a rapid antigen test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients evaluated in the emergency department: A preliminary report. J. Infect. **2020**, 82, 14–16. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Clinical+application+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+for+the+detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+infection+in+symptomatic+and+asymptomatic+patients+evaluated+in+the+emergency+department:+A+preliminary+report&author=Turcato,+G.&author=Zaboli,+A.&author=Pfeifer,+N.&author=Ciccariello,+L.&author=Sibilio,+S.&author=Tezza,+G.&author=Ausserhofer,+D.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=14%E2%80%9316&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.012&pmid=33347944)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.012)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33347944)\] 43. Weitzel, T.; Legarraga, P.; Iruretagoyena, M.; Pizarro, G.; Vollrath, V.; Araos, R.; Munita, J.M.; Porte, L. Comparative evaluation of four rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection tests using universal transport medium. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 39, 101942. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Comparative+evaluation+of+four+rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+tests+using+universal+transport+medium&author=Weitzel,+T.&author=Legarraga,+P.&author=Iruretagoyena,+M.&author=Pizarro,+G.&author=Vollrath,+V.&author=Araos,+R.&author=Munita,+J.M.&author=Porte,+L.&publication_year=2021&journal=Travel+Med.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=39&pages=101942&doi=10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101942&pmid=33278609)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101942)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33278609)\] 44. Yamayoshi, S.; Sakai-Tagawa, Y.; Koga, M.; Akasaka, O.; Nakachi, I.; Koh, H.; Maeda, K.; Adachi, E.; Saito, M.; Nagai, H. Comparison of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19. Viruses **2020**, 12, 1420. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Comparison+of+Rapid+Antigen+Tests+for+COVID-19&author=Yamayoshi,+S.&author=Sakai-Tagawa,+Y.&author=Koga,+M.&author=Akasaka,+O.&author=Nakachi,+I.&author=Koh,+H.&author=Maeda,+K.&author=Adachi,+E.&author=Saito,+M.&author=Nagai,+H.&publication_year=2020&journal=Viruses&volume=12&pages=1420&doi=10.3390/v12121420&pmid=33322035)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/v12121420)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33322035)\] 45. Oishee, M.J.; Ali, T.; Jahan, N.; Khandker, S.S.; Haq, M.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Sil, B.K.; Lugova, H.; Krishnapillai, A.; Abubakar, A.R. COVID-19 pandemic: Review of contemporary and forthcoming detection tools. Infect. Drug Resist. **2021**, 14, 1049–1082. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=COVID-19+pandemic:+Review+of+contemporary+and+forthcoming+detection+tools&author=Oishee,+M.J.&author=Ali,+T.&author=Jahan,+N.&author=Khandker,+S.S.&author=Haq,+M.A.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Sil,+B.K.&author=Lugova,+H.&author=Krishnapillai,+A.&author=Abubakar,+A.R.&publication_year=2021&journal=Infect.+Drug+Resist.&volume=14&pages=1049%E2%80%931082&doi=10.2147/IDR.S289629&pmid=33762831)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S289629)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33762831)\] 46. Rao, S.N.; Manissero, D.; Steele, V.R.; Pareja, J. A narrative systematic review of the clinical utility of cycle threshold values in the context of COVID-19. Infect. Dis. Ther. **2020**, 9, 573–586. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=A+narrative+systematic+review+of+the+clinical+utility+of+cycle+threshold+values+in+the+context+of+COVID-19&author=Rao,+S.N.&author=Manissero,+D.&author=Steele,+V.R.&author=Pareja,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=Infect.+Dis.+Ther.&volume=9&pages=573%E2%80%93586&doi=10.1007/s40121-020-00324-3&pmid=32725536)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-020-00324-3)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32725536)\] 47. Surkova, E.; Nikolayevskyy, V.; Drobniewski, F. False-positive COVID-19 results: Hidden problems and costs. Lancet Respir. Med. **2020**, 8, 1167–1168. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=False-positive+COVID-19+results:+Hidden+problems+and+costs&author=Surkova,+E.&author=Nikolayevskyy,+V.&author=Drobniewski,+F.&publication_year=2020&journal=Lancet+Respir.+Med.&volume=8&pages=1167%E2%80%931168&doi=10.1016/S2213-2600\(20\)30453-7)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600\(20\)30453-7)\] 48. Kucirka, L.M.; Lauer, S.A.; Laeyendecker, O.; Boon, D.; Lessler, J. Variation in false-negative rate of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction–based SARS-CoV-2 tests by time since exposure. Ann. Intern. Med. **2020**, 173, 262–267. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Variation+in+false-negative+rate+of+reverse+transcriptase+polymerase+chain+reaction%E2%80%93based+SARS-CoV-2+tests+by+time+since+exposure&author=Kucirka,+L.M.&author=Lauer,+S.A.&author=Laeyendecker,+O.&author=Boon,+D.&author=Lessler,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=Ann.+Intern.+Med.&volume=173&pages=262%E2%80%93267&doi=10.7326/M20-1495&pmid=32422057)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1495)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32422057)\] 49. Ai, T.; Yang, Z.; Hou, H.; Zhan, C.; Chen, C.; Lv, W.; Tao, Q.; Sun, Z.; Xia, L. Correlation of chest CT and RT-PCR testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A report of 1014 cases. Radiology **2020**, 296, 32–40. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Correlation+of+chest+CT+and+RT-PCR+testing+for+coronavirus+disease+2019+\(COVID-19\)+in+China:+A+report+of+1014+cases&author=Ai,+T.&author=Yang,+Z.&author=Hou,+H.&author=Zhan,+C.&author=Chen,+C.&author=Lv,+W.&author=Tao,+Q.&author=Sun,+Z.&author=Xia,+L.&publication_year=2020&journal=Radiology&volume=296&pages=32%E2%80%9340&doi=10.1148/radiol.2020200642&pmid=32101510)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200642)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32101510)\] \[[Green Version](https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148/radiol.2020200642)\] 50. Sil, B.K.; Jahan, N.; Haq, M.A.; Oishee, M.J.; Ali, T.; Khandker, S.S.; Kobatake, E.; Mie, M.; Khondoker, M.U.; Jamiruddin, M.R. Development and performance evaluation of a rapid in-house ELISA for retrospective serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2. PLoS ONE **2021**, 16, e0246346. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Development+and+performance+evaluation+of+a+rapid+in-house+ELISA+for+retrospective+serosurveillance+of+SARS-CoV-2&author=Sil,+B.K.&author=Jahan,+N.&author=Haq,+M.A.&author=Oishee,+M.J.&author=Ali,+T.&author=Khandker,+S.S.&author=Kobatake,+E.&author=Mie,+M.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Jamiruddin,+M.R.&publication_year=2021&journal=PLoS+ONE&volume=16&pages=e0246346&doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0246346&pmid=33529223)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246346)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33529223)\] 51. Paek, S.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Cho, J.-H.; Kim, Y.-S. Development of rapid one-step immunochromatographic assay. Methods **2000**, 22, 53–60. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Development+of+rapid+one-step+immunochromatographic+assay&author=Paek,+S.-H.&author=Lee,+S.-H.&author=Cho,+J.-H.&author=Kim,+Y.-S.&publication_year=2000&journal=Methods&volume=22&pages=53%E2%80%9360&doi=10.1006/meth.2000.1036)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2000.1036)\] \[[Green Version](http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9a56/726c272c4620cfb4647332ebdb71e84b6997.pdf)\] 52. Odell, I.D.; Cook, D. Immunofluorescence techniques. J. Investig. Dermatol. **2013**, 133, e4. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Immunofluorescence+techniques&author=Odell,+I.D.&author=Cook,+D.&publication_year=2013&journal=J.+Investig.+Dermatol.&volume=133&pages=e4&doi=10.1038/jid.2012.455)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2012.455)\] \[[Green Version](http://www.jidonline.org/article/S0022202X15359546/pdf)\] 53. Sil, B.K.; Jamiruddin, M.R.; Haq, M.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Jahan, N.; Khandker, S.S.; Ali, T.; Oishee, M.J.; Kaitsuka, T.; Mie, M. AuNP Coupled Rapid Flow-Through Dot-Blot Immuno-Assay for Enhanced Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Specific Nucleocapsid and Receptor Binding Domain IgG. Int. J. Nanomed. **2021**, 16, 4739–4753. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=AuNP+Coupled+Rapid+Flow-Through+Dot-Blot+Immuno-Assay+for+Enhanced+Detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+Specific+Nucleocapsid+and+Receptor+Binding+Domain+IgG&author=Sil,+B.K.&author=Jamiruddin,+M.R.&author=Haq,+M.A.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Jahan,+N.&author=Khandker,+S.S.&author=Ali,+T.&author=Oishee,+M.J.&author=Kaitsuka,+T.&author=Mie,+M.&publication_year=2021&journal=Int.+J.+Nanomed.&volume=16&pages=4739%E2%80%934753&doi=10.2147/IJN.S313140)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S313140)\] 54. Lanser, L.; Bellmann-Weiler, R.; Öttl, K.-W.; Huber, L.; Griesmacher, A.; Theurl, I.; Weiss, G. Evaluating the clinical utility and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in relation to RT-PCR Ct values. Infection **2020**, 49, 555–557. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluating+the+clinical+utility+and+sensitivity+of+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+testing+in+relation+to+RT-PCR+Ct+values&author=Lanser,+L.&author=Bellmann-Weiler,+R.&author=%C3%96ttl,+K.-W.&author=Huber,+L.&author=Griesmacher,+A.&author=Theurl,+I.&author=Weiss,+G.&publication_year=2020&journal=Infection&volume=49&pages=555%E2%80%93557&doi=10.1007/s15010-020-01542-0&pmid=33185807)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-020-01542-0)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33185807)\] 55. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interim Guidance on Ending Isolation and Precautions for Adults with COVID-19. 2021. Available online: <https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html> (accessed on 28 April 2021). 56. Jamal, A.J.; Mozafarihashjin, M.; Coomes, E.; Powis, J.; Li, A.X.; Paterson, A.; Anceva-Sami, S.; Barati, S.; Crowl, G.; Faheem, A. Sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Clin. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 72, 1064–1066. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Sensitivity+of+nasopharyngeal+swabs+and+saliva+for+the+detection+of+severe+acute+respiratory+syndrome+coronavirus+2&author=Jamal,+A.J.&author=Mozafarihashjin,+M.&author=Coomes,+E.&author=Powis,+J.&author=Li,+A.X.&author=Paterson,+A.&author=Anceva-Sami,+S.&author=Barati,+S.&author=Crowl,+G.&author=Faheem,+A.&publication_year=2021&journal=Clin.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=72&pages=1064%E2%80%931066&doi=10.1093/cid/ciaa848)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa848)\] 57. Zhao, L.; Li, L.; Liu, G.-q.; Chen, L.; Liu, X.; Zhu, J.; Li, B. Effect of freeze–thaw cycles on the molecular weight and size distribution of gluten. Food Res. Int. **2013**, 53, 409–416. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Effect+of+freeze%E2%80%93thaw+cycles+on+the+molecular+weight+and+size+distribution+of+gluten&author=Zhao,+L.&author=Li,+L.&author=Liu,+G.-q.&author=Chen,+L.&author=Liu,+X.&author=Zhu,+J.&author=Li,+B.&publication_year=2013&journal=Food+Res.+Int.&volume=53&pages=409%E2%80%93416&doi=10.1016/j.foodres.2013.04.013)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2013.04.013)\] \[[Green Version](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493)\] 58. Adnan, N.; Khondoker, M.U.; Rahman, M.S.; Ahmed, M.F.; Sharmin, S.; Sharif, N.; Azmuda, N.; Akter, S.; Nahar, S.; Mou, T.J. Coding-complete genome sequences and mutation profiles of nine SARS-CoV-2 strains detected from COVID-19 patients in Bangladesh. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. **2021**, 10, e00124-21. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Coding-complete+genome+sequences+and+mutation+profiles+of+nine+SARS-CoV-2+strains+detected+from+COVID-19+patients+in+Bangladesh&author=Adnan,+N.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Rahman,+M.S.&author=Ahmed,+M.F.&author=Sharmin,+S.&author=Sharif,+N.&author=Azmuda,+N.&author=Akter,+S.&author=Nahar,+S.&author=Mou,+T.J.&publication_year=2021&journal=Microbiol.+Resour.+Announc.&volume=10&pages=e00124-21&doi=10.1128/MRA.00124-21&pmid=33707329)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1128/MRA.00124-21)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33707329)\] 59. Singh, J.; Samal, J.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, J.; Agrawal, U.; Ehtesham, N.Z.; Sundar, D.; Rahman, S.A.; Hira, S.; Hasnain, S.E. Structure-function analyses of new SARS-CoV-2 variants B. 1.1. 7, B. 1.351 and B. 1.1. 28.1: Clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic and public health implications. Viruses **2021**, 13, 439. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Structure-function+analyses+of+new+SARS-CoV-2+variants+B.+1.1.+7,+B.+1.351+and+B.+1.1.+28.1:+Clinical,+diagnostic,+therapeutic+and+public+health+implications&author=Singh,+J.&author=Samal,+J.&author=Kumar,+V.&author=Sharma,+J.&author=Agrawal,+U.&author=Ehtesham,+N.Z.&author=Sundar,+D.&author=Rahman,+S.A.&author=Hira,+S.&author=Hasnain,+S.E.&publication_year=2021&journal=Viruses&volume=13&pages=439&doi=10.3390/v13030439)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/v13030439)\] 60. Hanson, K.E.; Altayar, O.; Caliendo, A.M.; Arias, C.A.; Englund, J.A.; Hayden, M.K.; Lee, M.J.; Loeb, M.; Patel, R.; El Alayli, A. The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Antigen Testing. Clin. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 23. Version 1.0.0. Available online: <https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/covid-19-guideline-antigen-testing> (accessed on 25 July 2021). ![Jcm 10 03493 g001 550](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g001-550.jpg) **Figure 1.** PRISMA flow diagram of study selection. **Figure 1.** PRISMA flow diagram of study selection. ![Jcm 10 03493 g001](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g001.png) ![Jcm 10 03493 g002 550](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g002-550.jpg) **Figure 2.** Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. **Figure 2.** Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. ![Jcm 10 03493 g002](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g002.png) ![Jcm 10 03493 g003a 550](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003a-550.jpg)![Jcm 10 03493 g003b 550](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003b-550.jpg) **Figure 3.** Forest plots representing estimating of (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. **Figure 3.** Forest plots representing estimating of (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. ![Jcm 10 03493 g003a](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003a.png)![Jcm 10 03493 g003b](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g003b.png) ![Jcm 10 03493 g004 550](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g004-550.jpg) **Figure 4.** Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. **Figure 4.** Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. ![Jcm 10 03493 g004](https://mdpi-res.com/jcm/jcm-10-03493/article_deploy/html/images/jcm-10-03493-g004.png) ![Table](https://mdpi-res.com/data/table.png) **Table 1.** Major characteristics of the included studies. **Table 1.** Major characteristics of the included studies. | Study ID \[References\] | Location | Total Subjects (% Female) Mean/Median Age | Type of Participants | Specimen Types | Positive Sample by RT-PCR (%) | Range of Ct Values | Testing Method | Rapid Antigen Test Kit (Manufacturer, Country) | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | Abdelrazik 2020 \[17\] | Egypt | 310 (40.6, 42) | C-19 (n = 160) and HCW + CC (n = 150) | NPS | 60\.6 | 15\.8–32.3 | ICG | Biocredit COVID-19 Ag Detection Kit (RapiGEN, Korea) | | AgullĂł 2020 \[18\] | Spain | 659 (56.4, 38) | SS (n = 394) and CC (n = 265) | NS, S | 20\.0 | 14\.0–33.0 (IQR) | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Albert 2020 \[12\] | Spain | 412 (58.0, 31) | SS (n = 412) | NPS | 13\.1 | ≀25–≀34 | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Alemany 2020 \[19\] | Spain | 1406 (NR, 40) | SS (n = 446), CC (n = 473) and GS (n = 487) | NPS, NMT | 67\.6 | 19\.7–27.3 (IQR) | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Azzi 2020 † \[20\] | Italy | 122 (67.2, 54) | C-19, SS and HCW | NPS, S | 23\.8 | NR | ICG | In house | | Cerutti 2020 \[21\] | Italy | 185 (NR, 45) | SS (n = 185) | NPS | 56\.2 | 12\.3–38.1 | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | 145 (NR, 36) | T (n = 145) | 3\.4 | | | | | | | | Chaimayo 2020 \[22\] | Thailand | 454 (56.2, 58) | CC, SS, T and POS. | NPS, TS, EA | 13\.2 | 10\.4–35.0 | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | Diao 2020 † \[23\] | China | 251 (51.4, 40) | SS (n = 251) | NPS | 80\.1 | ≀37.0–≀40.0 | FIA | In house | | Fenollar 2020 \[24\] | France | 341 (NR, NR) | SS (n = 182) and CC (n = 159) | NPS | 59\.8 | 9\.0–34.0 | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Gremmels 2020 † \[25\] | The Netherlands | 1367 (61.7, 36) | GS (n = 1367) | NPS, TS | 10\.2 | \<32.0–≄32.0 | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, USA) | | Aruba | 208 (NR, NR) | GS (n = 208) | 30\.3 | | | | | | | Gupta 2020 † \[26\] | India | 330 (30.0, 34) | SS (n = 204) and CC (n = 126) | NS, TS | 23\.3 | 10\.0–35.4 | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, India) | | KrĂŒttgen 2020 \[27\] | Germany | 150 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 75) and non-C-19 (n = 75) | NPS | 50\.0 | \<25.0–≄35.0 | ICG | SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche, Switzerland) | | Linares 2020 \[28\] | Spain | 255 (51.4, 46 \*) | SS, CC and AS | NPS | 23\.5 | \<25.0–\<40.0 | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Lindner 2020 † \[29\] | Germany | 287 (42.9, 35) | SS | NS \*\* | 13\.5 | 17\.3–≄35.5 | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | Liotti 2020 \[30\] | Italy | 359 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 104) and non-C-19 (n = 255) | NPS | 29\.0 | 15\.3–39.7 | FIA | Standardℱ F COVID-19 Ag (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | Mak 2020a \[31\] | Hong Kong | 280 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 280) | S, NPS, NPA, TS | 100\.0 | \<18.6–\>28.7 | ICG | COVID-19 Ag Respi-Strip (Coris Bioconcept, Belgium) | | NADAL COVID-19 Ag Test (Nal Von Minden, Germany) | | | | | | | | | | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | | | | | | | | | Mak 2020b \[32\] | Hong Kong | 105 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 105) | NPS, TS, S | 100\.0 | \<18.6–\>28.7 | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | | | | | | | | | Mak 2020c \[33\] | Hong Kong | 160 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 160) | S, NPS, TS, NPA, SP | 100\.0 | \<18.6–\>28.7 | ICG | Biocredit COVID-19 Ag Detection Kit, (RapiGEN, Korea) | | Nalumansi 2020 \[34\] | Uganda | 262 (10.7, 34) | SS (n = 136) and AS (n = 124) | NPS | 34\.4 | \<29–39 | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | Pilarowski 2020a \[35\] | USA | 878 (46.0, NR) | GS (n = 878) | NS | 3\.0 | 28\.8–30.3 | ICG | Abbott BinaxNOWℱ COVID-19 Ag (Abbott Diagnostics, USA) | | Pilarowski 2020b \[36\] | USA | 3302 (45.4, NR) | GS (n = 3302) | NS | 7\.2 | \<30.0–\<35.0 | ICG | Abbott BinaxNOWℱ COVID-19 Ag (Abbott Diagnostics, USA) | | Porte 2020 † \[37\] | Chile | 127 (46.5, 38) | SS + T + CC (n = 127) | NPS, OP | 64\.6 | 14\.2–25.1 (IQR) | FIA | Bioeasyℱ 2019-nCoV Ag RTK (Bioeasy Biotechnology, China) | | Scohy 2020 \[38\] | Belgium | 148 (56.8, 58) | SS (n = 148) | NPS | 71\.6 | 16\.0–36.0 | ICG | COVID-19 Ag Respi-Strip (Coris Bioconcept, Belgium) | | Strömer 2021 ‡ \[39\] | Germany | 134 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 124) and non-C-19 (n = 10) | NPS | 92\.5 | 17\.0–37.0 | ICG | NADAL COVID-19 Ag Test (Nal Von Minden, Germany) | | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | | | | | | | | | Toptan 2021 \[40\] | Germany | 67 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 58) and Non-C-19 (n = 9) | OP, NS | 86\.6 | 18\.7–40.0 | ICG | RIDAÂźQUICK SARS-CoV-2 Ag test (R-Biopharm, Germany) | | 70 (NR, NR) | GS (n = 70) | NS | 45\.7 | 18\.0–35.9 | ICG | RIDAÂźQUICK SARS-CoV-2 Ag test (R-Biopharm, Germany) | | | | Torress 2021 \[41\] | Spain | 634 (56.0, 37) | CC (n = 634) | NPS | 12\.4 | ≀20.0–\>35.0 | ICG | Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag-RTD (Abbott Diagnostics, Germany) | | Turcato 2020 \[42\] | Italy | 3410 (NR, NR) | SS (n = 991) and AS (n = 2419) | NR | 6\.5 | NR | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | Weitzel 2020 † \[43\] | Chile | 111 (55.0, 40) | SS (n = 111) | NPS | 72\.1 | 10\.7–37.7 | ICG | Biocredit COVID-19 Ag Detection Kit (RapiGEN, Korea) | | ICG | StrongStep COVID-19 Antigen test (Liming Bioproducts, China) | | | | | | | | | FIA | Huaketai New Coronavirus (Savant Biotechnology, China) | | | | | | | | | FIA | Bioeasyℱ 2019-nCoV Ag RTK (Bioeasy Biotechnology, China) | | | | | | | | | Yamayoshi 2020 \[44\] | Japan | 76 (NR, NR) \# | C-19 (n = 76) | S, TS, NS, NPS, SP, EA | 100\.0 | 18\.8–36.0 | ICG | Standardℱ Q COVID-19 Ag kit (SD Biosensor, Korea) | | EsplineÂź SARS-CoV-2 (Fujirebio, Japan) | | | | | | | | | | QuickNaviℱ-COVID19 Ag (Denka Seiken, Japan) | | | | | | | | | | ImmunoAce SARS-CoV-2 (Tauns Laboratories, Japan) | | | | | | | | | RT-PCR: Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, NR: Not reported, ICG: Immunochromatographic assay, FIA: Fluorescence immunoassay, IQR: Interquartile range, C-19: Confirmed COVID-19 patient, SS: Symptomatic patient (suggestive of COVID-19), AS: Asymptomatic patient, CC: Asymptomatic contact with known COVID-19 or symptomatic patient, HCW: Healthcare workers, GS: General screening, T: Travelers, POS: Pre-operative screening, NPS: Nasopharyngeal swab, S: Saliva, NS: Nasal swab, TS: Throat swab, EA: Endotracheal aspirates, OP: Oro-pharyngeal swab, NPA: Nasopharyngeal aspirate, SP: Sputum, RTD: Rapid test device, NMT: Nasal mid-turbinate. \# Archived samples of known RT-PCR result, † Reader-blinded study, ‡ With photo and intensity reader to support the reading, \* Based on presumption mean calculation, \*\* Self-collected. ![Table](https://mdpi-res.com/data/table.png) **Table 2.** Pooled specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection using the rapid antigen test kit. **Table 2.** Pooled specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection using the rapid antigen test kit. | Subgroups | Pooled Specificity and Sensitivity (95% Cis) (%) | Number of Studies Analysed | Total Number of Patients | Heterogeneity | | | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | I2 | p\-Value | | | | | | | **Specificity** | | | | | | | | Based on presence of symptoms | Symptomatic | 99\.1 (97.6–100.0) | 4 | 1823 | 89% | \<0.0001 | | Asymptomatic | 99\.5 (98.6–100.0) | 4 | 3280 | 92% | \<0.0001 | | | Based on symptom onset | Onset of symptoms \<5 days | 99\.3 (98.8–99.8) | 3 | 3537 | 34% | 0\.40 | | Onset of symptoms \>5 days | 100\.0 (99.0–100.0) | 2 | 138 | 0% | 0\.48 | | | Based on specimen types | Nasopharyngeal Swab | 71\.0 (14.1–100.1) | 2 | 611 | 99% | \<0.0001 | | Saliva | 80\.7 (41.8–100.0) | 2 | 547 | 97% | \<0.0001 | | | Based on continents | Asia | 99\.4 (98.7–100.0) | 3 | 697 | 0% | 0\.43 | | Europe | 99\.1 (98.6–99.7) | 16 | 7736 | 93% | \<0.0001 | | | North America | 99\.9 (99.8–100.0) | 2 | 3910 | 0% | 0\.70 | | | South America | 99\.3 (97.7–100.0) | 2 | 147 | 0% | 0\.95 | | | Based on countries | Chile | 99\.3 (97.7–100.0) | 2 | 147 | 0% | 0\.95 | | Germany | 99\.5 (98.7–100.0) | 4 | 344 | 0% | 0\.34 | | | Italy | 94\.0 (90.8–97.1) | 4 | 3812 | 98% | \<0.0001 | | | Spain | 99\.7 (99.2–100.0) | 5 | 2028 | 67% | 0\.03 | | | USA | 99\.9 (99.8–100.0) | 2 | 3910 | 0% | 0\.70 | | | Based on kit manufacturers | Abbott BinaxNOWℱ | 99\.9 (99.8–100.0) | 2 | 3910 | 0% | 0\.70 | | Biocredit | 99\.0 (97.1–100.0) | 1 | 102 | NA | NA | | | Panbioℱ | 99\.7 (99.4–100.0) | 8 | 3547 | 72% | 0\.001 | | | Standardℱ | 99\.4 (98.8–100.0) | 7 | 2100 | 74% | 0\.001 | | | **Sensitivity** | | | | | | | | Based on presence of symptoms | Symptomatic | 78\.5 (61.2–95.9) | 5 | 720 | 97% | \<0.0001 | | Asymptomatic | 54\.5 (24.3–84.7) | 5 | 217 | 96% | \<0.0001 | | | Based on symptom onset | Onset of symptoms \<5 days | 82\.0 (78.1–86.0) | 4 | 357 | 0% | 0\.72 | | Onset of symptoms \>5 days | 75\.1 (64.8–85.4) | 3 | 66 | 0% | 0\.43 | | | Based on specimen types | Nasopharyngeal Swab | 70\.1 (54.1–86.1) | 5 | 339 | 91% | \<0.0001 | | Saliva | 50\.4 (7.9–92.9) | 3 | 284 | 99% | \<0.0001 | | | Throat saliva or swab | 38\.4 (13.7–63.1) | 4 | 193 | 93% | \<0.0001 | | | Based on Ct values | Ct value ≀20 | 98\.8 (96.1–100.0) | 5 | 108 | 0% | 0\.96 | | Ct value 21–25 | 89\.6 (80.1–99.0) | 6 | 242 | 85% | \<0.0001 | | | Ct value 26–30 | 55\.4 (24.0–86.7) | 7 | 323 | 98% | \<0.0001 | | | Ct value 31–35 | 15\.1 (4.5–25.7) | 7 | 202 | 86% | \<0.0001 | | | Ct value 36–40 | 16\.5 (0.0–34.4) | 3 | 17 | 0% | 0\.89 | | | Based on continents | Africa | 56\.4 (30.0–82.7) | 2 | 278 | 95% | \<0.0001 | | Asia | 65\.0 (42.3–87.8) | 7 | 1047 | 99% | \<0.0001 | | | Europe | 70\.0 (61.3–78.6) | 16 | 2593 | 96% | \<0.0001 | | | North America | 74\.8 (44.2–100.0) | 2 | 263 | 90% | 0\.001 | | | South America | 73\.4 (33.2–100.0) | 2 | 328 | 99% | \<0.0001 | | | Based on countries | Chile | 73\.4 (33.2–100.0) | 2 | 328 | 99% | \<0.0001 | | Germany | 72\.8 (63.3–82.3) | 8 | 815 | 91% | \<0.0001 | | | Hong Kong | 55\.8 (31.3–80.3) | 3 | 405 | 97% | \<0.0001 | | | Italy | 72\.8 (56.7–88.8) | 4 | 519 | 95% | \<0.0001 | | | Spain | 71\.2 (52.6–89.8) | 5 | 1266 | 97% | \<0.0001 | | | USA | 74\.8 (44.2–100.0) | 2 | 263 | 90% | 0\.001 | | | Based on kit manufacturers | Abbott BinaxNOWℱ | 74\.8 (44.2–100.0) | 2 | 263 | 90% | 0\.001 | | Biocredit | 42\.7 (30.7–54.7) | 3 | 594 | 89% | \<0.0001 | | | Panbioℱ | 75\.1 (64.9–85.3) | 9 | 1789 | 96% | \<0.0001 | | | Standardℱ | 66\.4 (48.5–84.2) | 8 | 634 | 97% | \<0.0001 | | CIs: confidence intervals; NA: not applicable; Ct: cycle threshold. ![Table](https://mdpi-res.com/data/table.png) **Table 3.** Sensitivity analyses. **Table 3.** Sensitivity analyses. | Strategies of Sensitivity Analyses | Pooled Specificity and Sensitivity (95% Cis) (%) | Difference of Results | Number of Studies Analysed | Total Number of Subjects | Heterogeneity | | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | I2 | p\-Value | | | | | | | **Specificity** | | | | | | | | Excluding small studies (\<100) | 99\.4 (99.1–99.8) | No change | 18 | 12,431 | 93% | \<0.0001 | | Excluding low- or moderate-quality studies | 99\.6 (99.1–100.0) | 0\.2% higher | 6 | 2556 | 74% | \<0.001 | | Using a fixed-effects model | 99\.9 (99.8–100.0) | 0\.5% higher | 24 | 12,662 | 90% | \<0.001 | | Excluding outlier studies | 99\.7 (99.5–99.9) | 0\.03% higher | 23 | 12,513 | 71% | \<0.001 | | **Sensitivity** | | | | | | | | Excluding small studies (\<100) | 62\.0 (51.1–72.9) | 6\.4% lower | 17 | 3736 | 99% | \<0.0001 | | Excluding low- or moderate-quality studies | 69\.8 (56.7–82.9) | 1\.4% higher | 8 | 937 | 96% | \<0.0001 | | Using a fixed-effects model | 79\.9 (60.8–75.9) | 11\.5% higher | 29 | 4509 | 98% | \<0.0001 | | Excluding outlier studies | 71\.2 (64.8–77.6) | 2\.8% higher | 27 | 4045 | 97% | \<0.0001 | CIs: confidence intervals | | | |---|---| | | **Publisher’s Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. | © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/>). ## Article Metrics Citations - [Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Diagnostic+Accuracy+of+Rapid+Antigen+Test+Kits+for+Detecting+SARS-CoV-2%3A+A+Systematic+Review+and+Meta-Analysis+of+17%2C171+Suspected+COVID-19+Patients&volume=10&doi=10.3390%2Fjcm10163493&journal=Journal+of+Clinical+Medicine&publication_year=2021&author=Shahad+Saif+Khandker&author=Nik+Haszroel+Hysham+Nik+Hashim&author=Zakuan+Zainy+Deris&author=Rafidah+Hanim+Shueb&author=Md+Asiful+Islam) 94 [Scopus](https://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85112633719&origin=inward) 55 [PubMed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?linkname=pubmed_pubmed_citedin&from_uid=34441789) 54 [PMC](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8397079/citedby/) 87 [Web of Science](https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000689067400001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=7e717b028bc90856e7c55c7029afc773) 93 Crossref - Vilakazi, F.P.; Motaung, I.; Pampanin, D.M.; Wepener, V.; Gulumian, M.; Kamika, I.A.; Mabuba, N.; Botha, T.L. Nanoenabled Rapid Antigen Test Kits: A Potential Waste Source of Concern with Implications for Environmental Impact. *Environmental Science & Technology Letters* **2026**, acs.estlett.5c00908. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00908)\] - Pandey, R.K.; Vandana; Desai, S.; Suravajhala, P.; Chaubey, G. Cycle Threshold (Ct) Value Trends in COVID‐19: Analyzing Gender, Age, and Severity Factors Across Major Waves in India. *Immunity, Inflammation and Disease* **2026**, 14, e70304. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iid3.70304)\] - Hanif, S.; Zahoor, R.; Pranta, M.M.; Shahjahan, M.; Khandker, S.S. Assessment of gender gap within patients in public-private partnership-based hospital management system: a systematic review and meta-analysis. *Humanities and Social Sciences Communications* **2026**. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06761-8)\] - Mustafa, A.; Khandker, S.S.; Farwa, U.; Saeed, M.H.; Sarfraz, M.; Manan, A.; Gillani, H.I.; Akbar, A.; Ejaz, K.F.; Atta, A.; Atta, M.; Pranto, A.H.; Gomes, B.; Lubaba, A.; Mohaimeen, T.; Abir, S.N.; Saleem Khan, M. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection and associated post transplantation lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT): a prevalence based systematic review and meta-analysis on global epidemiology. *Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy* **2026**, 26, 105. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2025.2557615)\] - Alves, R.C.; Roma, J.H.F.; Carneiro, B.M.; Pavoni, J.H.C.; Slhessarenko, R.D. Standardization and performance of SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP detection: a reliable, inexpensive, and alternative diagnostic assay. *Brazilian Journal of Microbiology* **2025**, 56, 2757. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42770-025-01789-5)\] - Ali Malik, Y.; Khan, S.; Roghani, S.H.; Nizami, A.A.; Qadir, M.; Haseeb, A.; Umer, M.R.; Akbar, A.; Hasan Pranto, A.; Hossen Mahin, T.; Ahmed, I.; Khandker, S.S. Association of Anticardiolipin Antibody in Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Cureus* **2025**. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.91474)\] - Zacharias, K.; Meller, S.; ten Hagen, N.A.; Volk, H.A.; Twele, F. Public perception of medical detection dogs and other COVID-19 testing strategies. *Frontiers in Public Health* **2025**, 13, 1641243. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1641243)\] - Nairz, M.; Weiss, G. How to identify respiratory pathogens in primary health care - a review on the benefits, prospects and pitfalls in using point of care tests. *Infection* **2025**, 53, 2321. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s15010-025-02600-1)\] - Wu, J.; Zhou, X.; Tsang, C.Y.; Mei, Q.; Zhang, Y. Bioengineered nanomaterials for dynamic diagnostics in vivo. *Chemical Society Reviews* **2025**, 54, 5470. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/D5CS00136F)\] - Ndimbii, J.; Djikeussi, T.; Kana, R.; Siamba, S.; Machekano, R.; Bhatt, N.; Yemaneberhan, A.; Pearson, S.; Wanyama, E.; Mwancha-Kwasa, C.; Epee, E.; Tchounga, B.; Tiam, A.; Masaba, R.O. Assessing time requirements of two models of SARS-CoV-2 screening and testing in routine healthcare services in Kenya and Cameroon: a descriptive study. *BMJ Public Health* **2025**, 2, e001154. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2024-001154)\] - Khandker, S.S.; Jahan, S.; Khan, A.A.; Abrittee, B.F.; Nanjiba, R.; Islam, D.Z.; Suez, E.; Rahman, M.H.; Farahim, F.; Ali, T.; Begum, R. Global epidemiology of HIV among dialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. *International Urology and Nephrology* **2025**, 57, 2209. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11255-025-04421-5)\] - Lima, T.M.; Leal, D.M.; Ferreira, Z.C.; Souza, F.d.J.; de Oliveira, D.B.; Rocha-Vieira, E.; Martins, H.R.; Pereira, A.C.; Ferreira, L.F. Development and Optimization of a Cost-Effective Electrochemical Immunosensor for Rapid COVID-19 Diagnosis. *Biosensors* **2025**, 15, 67. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bios15020067)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2079-6374/15/2/67) (cited 1 time) - Yoou, M.-S.; Jeong, J.H.; Choi, E.-H.; Kim, Y.; Ihm, C. Clinical Performance Evaluation of the Ag Test for Detecting SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A/B Viruses Using Nasopharyngeal Swabs. *Journal of Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance* **2024**, 46, 208. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.15263/jlmqa.2024.46.4.208)\] - Shabbir, N.A.; Kant, S.B.; Rashid, K.; Hafeez, U.; Akbar, A.A.; Batool, S.W.; Pranto, A.H.; Zaman, J.; Shahriyer Tonmoy, H.; Islam, M.R.; Meem, M.M.R.M.; Islam, D.Z.; Suez, E.; Khandker, S.S.; Akbar, A.; Khattak, M.I.; Ali, A.I.; Jadoon, S.K.; Shakeel, A.; Zubair, M.; Alvi, S. Prevalence of HIV/AIDS among pregnant women in North American region: A systematic review and meta-analysis. *Medicine* **2024**, 103, e40339. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000040339)\] (cited 2 times) - Botonis, O.K.; Mendley, J.; Aalla, S.; Veit, N.C.; Fanton, M.; Lee, J.; Tripathi, V.; Pandi, V.; Khobragade, A.; Chaudhary, S.; Chaudhuri, A.; Narayanan, V.; Xu, S.; Jeong, H.; Rogers, J.A.; Jayaraman, A. Feasibility of snapshot testing using wearable sensors to detect cardiorespiratory illness (COVID infection in India). *npj Digital Medicine* **2024**, 7, 289. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01287-2)\] - Ghulam, B.; Bashir, Z.; Akram, A.K.; Umaira Khan, Q.; Qadir, M.; Hussain, S.; Akbar, A.; Jadoon, S.K. C-reactive Protein (CRP) in Patients With Myocarditis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Cureus* **2024**. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.71885)\] - Zahra, S.; Saleem, M.K.; Ejaz, K.F.; Akbar, A.; Jadoon, S.K.; Hussain, S.; Ali, A.I.; Ifty, M.; Jannati, S.Z.; Armin, F.; Sarker, D.; Islam, D.Z.; Khandker, S.S.; Khan, M.S.; Alvi, S. Prevalence of nephropathy among diabetic patients in North American region: A systematic review and meta-analysis. *Medicine* **2024**, 103, e39759. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000039759)\] (cited 7 times) - Hu, J.; Hu, J.; Jin, L.; Hu, D.; Nicholls, P.K.; Wang, T.; Ren, Y.; Hu, D.; Ma, B. Use of high-resolution fluorescence in situ hybridization for fast and robust detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs. *Scientific Reports* **2024**, 14, 20906. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70980-9)\] - Saleem, S.; Rehman, A.; Akbar, A.; Ali, A.I.; Jadoon, S.K.; Khattak, M.I.; Mehraj, A. Meta-Analysis of the Global Mortality Rate Due to Infection in Burn Patients Admitted for Plastic Surgery. *Cureus* **2024**. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.67425)\] (cited 2 times) - Hong, S.A. Toward better pandemic governance and preparedness: South Korea’s whole-of-nation approach to COVID-19. *BMC Public Health* **2024**, 24, 2126. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19655-8)\] (cited 2 times) - Song, S.; Zeng, Q.; Liu, C.; Xiao, N.; Gai, S.; Ding, H.; He, F.; Yang, P. Upconversion luminescence resonance energy transfer (LRET)-based dual-channel biosensor for rapid detection of coronavirus. *Journal of Alloys and Compounds* **2024**, 1003, 175663. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2024.175663)\] - Omonkhua, A.A.; Faneye, A.; Akinwande, K.S.; Evaezi, O.; Shehu, N.Y.; Onayade, A.; Ochu, C.L.; Popoola, M.; Emmanuel, N.; Ojo, T.; Ohonsi, C.; Abubakar, A.; Odeh, E.; Akinduti, P.; Folarin, O.; Bimba, J.S.; Igumbor, E.; Elimian, K.; Edem, V.F.; Pam D., L.; Olusola, T.; Ntoimo, L.; Olugbile, M.; Opayele, A.V.; Kida, I.; David, S.; Onyeaghala, A.; Igbarumah, I.; Maduka, O.; Mahmoud, M.A.; El-Fulatty, A.R.; Olaleye, D.O.; Simon, O.; Osaigbovo, I.I.; Obaseki, D.E.; Tolulupe, A.; Happi, C.; Jibrin, Y.B.; Okonofua, F.; Eliya, T.; Simji, G.; Abi, I.J.; Ameh, E.; Maigari, I.M.; Alhaji, S.; Adetifa, I.; Salako, B.; Bogoro, S.; Ihekweazu, C.; Odaibo, G.N. Performance evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 rapid diagnostic tests in Nigeria: A cross-sectional study. *PLOS Global Public Health* **2024**, 4, e0003371. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0003371)\] - Kiani, P.; Hendriksen, P.A.; Kim, A.J.; Garssen, J.; Verster, J.C. Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Presentation of Individuals Who Test Positive or Negative for SARS-CoV-2: Results from a Test Street Study. *Viruses* **2024**, 16, 1031. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v16071031)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/16/7/1031) - Phamonpon, W.; Hinestroza, J.P.; Puthongkham, P.; Rodthongkum, N. Surface-engineered natural fibers: Emerging alternative substrates for chemical sensor applications: A review. *International Journal of Biological Macromolecules* **2024**, 269, 132185. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.132185)\] (cited 1 time) - Manten, K.; Katzenschlager, S.; BrĂŒmmer, L.E.; Schmitz, S.; Gaeddert, M.; Erdmann, C.; Grilli, M.; Pollock, N.R.; MacĂ©, A.; Erkosar, B.; Carmona, S.; Ongarello, S.; Johnson, C.C.; Sacks, J.A.; Faehling, V.; Bornemann, L.; Weigand, M.A.; Denkinger, C.M.; Yerlikaya, S. Clinical accuracy of instrument-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen diagnostic tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis. *Virology Journal* **2024**, 21, 99. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12985-024-02371-5)\] (cited 4 times) - Gezahagne, H.F.; Jin, D.S.; Vogel, E.M. The influence of charge on the translation of the sandwich ELISA approach to electronic biosensors. *Journal of Colloid and Interface Science* **2024**, 668, 223. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2024.04.139)\] - Wongchai, T.; Chuenchom, N.; Klayut, W.; Phetsuksiri, B.; Bhakdeenuan, P.; Bunchoo, S.; Srisungngam, S.; Rudeeaneksin, J. Clinical Performance of the Reverse Transcription-Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 in a Thai Community Hospital at the Thailand-Myanmar Border. *Cureus* **2024**. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.54447)\] - Saleem, M.K.; Sattar, K.; Ejaz, K.F.; Rehman, M.U.; Saleem, H.; Khursheed, S.; Akbar, A.; Ahmed, J.; Tariq, M.; Jadoon, S.K.; Saleem Khan, M.; Tasneem, S.; Khandker, S.S.; Kundu, S.; Alvi, S. Use of telemedicine to tackle health problems in South Asia during the COVID-19 era and beyond: a systematic review. *Annals of Medicine & Surgery* **2024**, 86, 1012. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MS9.0000000000001649)\] (cited 4 times) - Jiang, K.P.; Bennett, S.; Heiniger, E.K.; Kumar, S.; Yager, P. UbiNAAT: a multiplexed point-of-care nucleic acid diagnostic platform for rapid at-home pathogen detection. *Lab on a Chip* **2024**, 24, 492. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/D3LC00753G)\] (cited 4 times) - Chang, B.-Y.; Chen, F.-L.; Hsu, C.-C.; Chen, W.-H.; Shang, L.-D.; Hsiao, Y.-C. Cholesteric nanostructure biosensors on flexible paper fibres for disease detection through label-free techniques and image analysis. *Liquid Crystals* **2024**, 51, 215. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678292.2023.2290216)\] (cited 1 time) - Johnston, A.; Wong, A.; Appo, C.; Eley, R.; Staib, A. Modelling a two‐stream emergency department segregation and admission system from COVID‐19 early rapid antigen testing: A pilot study. *Emergency Medicine Australasia* **2024**, 36, 283. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.14351)\] - Ye, X.-L.; Gan, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, Z.-Q.; Liao, A.-M.; Li, J.-Z.; Li, Y.-T.; Wu, S.-M.; Zhang, Y.-F.; Li, Y.; Zhao, L.-Z.; Wang, P.; Huang, Y.; Ai, L.; Zhang, Y.; Tan, W.-L. A quick online cross-sectional study of knowledge, attitude, practice, and information media toward the Omicron pandemic in China. *Journal of Public Health* **2024**, 32, 2223. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10389-023-01979-1)\] - Kumar, S.; Bhowmik, B. Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Via Rapid Antigen Kits. *2023 IEEE Technology & Engineering Management Conference - Asia Pacific (TEMSCON-ASPAC)* **2023**, 1. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEMSCON-ASPAC59527.2023.10531579)\] (cited 4 times) - BULDUK, K.D.; ÇÖL, M. Yeni KoronavirĂŒs Hastalığında (Covid-19) Tanı Ve Tarama Testlerinin Kullanımı. *ArƟiv Kaynak Tarama Dergisi* **2023**, 32, 189. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.17827/aktd.1226153)\] - Kim, S.W.; Park, Y.; Kim, D.; Jeong, S.H. A single-center experience on long-term clinical performance of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Test, STANDARD Q COVID-19 Ag Test. *Scientific Reports* **2023**, 13, 20777. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-48194-2)\] - Hongjaisee, S.; Kham-Kjing, N.; Musikul, P.; Daengkaokhew, W.; Kongson, N.; Guntala, R.; Jaiyapan, N.; Kline, E.; Panpradist, N.; Ngo-Giang-Huong, N.; Khamduang, W. A Single-Tube Colorimetric Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. *Diagnostics* **2023**, 13, 3040. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13193040)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/13/19/3040) (cited 2 times) - Tran, T.T.-T.; Tran, H.P.; Vu, S.N.-T.; Tran, T.T.-N.; Nguyen, T.N.; Ho, N.T.-X.; Pham, L.T.-M.; Pham, B.T.; Hoang, T.T.-D. Possible Factors Related to Mortality of Pregnant Women with COVID-19: A Machine Learning Approach. *Fertility & Reproduction* **2023**, 05, 176. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S2661318223500172)\] - Zhang, D.; Kukkar, D.; Kim, K.-H. Immunological tests: Essential and supportive tools in the fight against COVID-19. *TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry* **2023**, 168, 117291. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2023.117291)\] (cited 2 times) - Mazhar, S.; Ullah, Z.; Shah, S.I.A.; Badshah, N. Development of a probabilistic model for Covid-19 dynamics with consideration of non-severe and severe infections. *Alexandria Engineering Journal* **2023**, 82, 126. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2023.09.067)\] (cited 2 times) - Hoffmann, E.d.R.; Balzan, L.d.R.; Inamine, E.; Pancotto, L.R.; Gaboardi, G.; Cantarelli, V.V. Performance of Reverse Transcription Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification (RT-LAMP) Targeting the RNA Polymerase Gene for the Direct Detection of SARS-CoV2 in Nasopharyngeal Swabs. *International Journal of Molecular Sciences* **2023**, 24, 13056. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241713056)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/24/17/13056) (cited 4 times) - Krenn, F.; DĂ€chert, C.; Badell, I.; Lupoli, G.; Öztan, G.N.; Feng, T.; Schneider, N.; Huber, M.; Both, H.; SpĂ€th, P.M.; Muenchhoff, M.; Graf, A.; Krebs, S.; Blum, H.; Durner, J.; Czibere, L.; Kaderali, L.; Keppler, O.T.; Baldauf, H.-M.; Osterman, A. Ten rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 widely differ in their ability to detect Omicron-BA.4 and -BA.5. *Medical Microbiology and Immunology* **2023**, 212, 323. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00430-023-00775-8)\] (cited 6 times) - Yang, Y.-P.; Jiesisibieke, Z.L.; Tung, T.-H. Association Between Rapid Antigen Detection Tests and Real-Time Reverse Transcription–Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses. *International Journal of Public Health* **2023**, 68, 1605452. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2023.1605452)\] - Meller, S.; Caraguel, C.; Twele, F.; Charalambous, M.; Schoneberg, C.; Chaber, A.-L.; Desquilbet, L.; Grandjean, D.; Mardones, F.O.; Kreienbrock, L.; de la Rocque, S.; Volk, H.A. Canine olfactory detection of SARS-CoV-2-infected humans—a systematic review. *Annals of Epidemiology* **2023**, 85, 68. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.05.002)\] (cited 5 times) - Sengupta, J.; Hussain, C.M. Graphene-Based Electrochemical Nano-Biosensors for Detection of SARS-CoV-2. *Inorganics* **2023**, 11, 197. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11050197)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2304-6740/11/5/197) (cited 21 times) - Zhu, Y.; Tiwari, A.; Monteiro, J.; Kshirsagar, S.; Falk, T.H. COVID-19 Detection via Fusion of Modulation Spectrum and Linear Prediction Speech Features. *IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing* **2023**, 31, 1536. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TASLP.2023.3265603)\] (cited 4 times) - Bayani, M.; Asadi, M.; Ghaemian, N.; Baziboroun, M. Comparison of Chest CT Findings between COVID-19 Pneumonia and Influenza Pneumonia. *The Russian Archives of Internal Medicine* **2023**, 13, 110. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.20514/2226-6704-2023-13-2-110-115)\] - Veroniki, A.A.; Tricco, A.C.; Watt, J.; Tsokani, S.; Khan, P.A.; Soobiah, C.; Negm, A.; Doherty-Kirby, A.; Taylor, P.; Lunny, C.; McGowan, J.; Little, J.; Mallon, P.; Moher, D.; Wong, S.; Dinnes, J.; Takwoingi, Y.; Saxinger, L.; Chan, A.; Isaranuwatchai, W.; Lander, B.; Meyers, A.; Poliquin, G.; Straus, S.E. Rapid antigen-based and rapid molecular tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: a rapid review with network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. *BMC Medicine* **2023**, 21, 110. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-023-02810-0)\] (cited 10 times) - Li, Y. Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Antigen Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Approved for Use in China. *Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology* **2023**, 36, 662. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.54097/hset.v36i.5757)\] - Alhabbab, R.Y. Economical and Easily Obtainable Tools to Manually Develop Lateral Flow Immunoassay Strips. *ACS Omega* **2023**, 8, 9170. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c07014)\] (cited 3 times) - Bourgin, M.; Durand, S.; Kroemer, G. Diagnostic, Prognostic and Mechanistic Biomarkers of COVID-19 Identified by Mass Spectrometric Metabolomics. *Metabolites* **2023**, 13, 342. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo13030342)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/13/3/342) (cited 10 times) - Mohammadie, Z.E.; Akhlaghi, S.; Samaeinasab, S.; Shaterzadeh‐Bojd, S.; Jamialahmadi, T.; Sahebkar, A. Clinical performance of rapid antigen tests in comparison to RT‐PCR for SARS‐COV‐2 diagnosis in Omicron variant: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. *Reviews in Medical Virology* **2023**, 33, e2428. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2428)\] (cited 22 times) - Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Salim, R. The global prevalence of vestibular dysfunction in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. *European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology* **2023**, 280, 2663. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-07842-z)\] (cited 3 times) - Wojtusiak, J.; Bagais, W.; Vang, J.; Roess, A.; Alemi, F. Order of Occurrence of COVID-19 Symptoms. *Quality Management in Health Care* **2023**, 32, S29. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QMH.0000000000000397)\] (cited 6 times) - Chen, C.-C.; Chen, S.-Y.; Fang, S.-B.; Lu, S.-C.; Bai, C.-H.; Wang, Y.-H. Diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in the pediatric population: A systematic review and meta-analysis. *Pediatrics & Neonatology* **2023**, 64, 247. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pedneo.2022.07.012)\] (cited 6 times) - Lippi, G.; Henry, B.M.; Plebani, M. An overview of the most important preanalytical factors influencing the clinical performance of SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs). *Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)* **2023**, 61, 196. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2022-1058)\] (cited 9 times) - Alzahrani, A.M.; Altayawi, F.J.F.; Alrasheedi, B.B.; Alanzi, ‏.A.N.; Alanazi, A.A.; Almutairi, S.H.; Alsulami, A.H. COVID-19 severe conditions: EMS, pharmacists, and health informatics strategies and community impact. *International journal of health sciences* **2022**, 6, 1850. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6nS10.15172)\] - Duma, Z.; Ramsuran, V.; Chuturgoon, A.A.; Edward, V.A.; Naidoo, P.; Mkhize-Kwitshana, Z.L. Evaluation of Various Alternative Economical and High Throughput SARS-CoV-2 Testing Methods within Resource-Limited Settings. *International Journal of Molecular Sciences* **2022**, 23, 14350. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms232214350)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/22/14350) (cited 4 times) - Linert, J. Applications of Microfluidics and Nanotechnologies for Point-of-Care Devices. *IFAC-PapersOnLine* **2022**, 55, 364. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.12.054)\] (cited 3 times) - Alhabbab, R.Y. Lateral Flow Immunoassays for Detecting Viral Infectious Antigens and Antibodies. *Micromachines* **2022**, 13, 1901. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/mi13111901)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2072-666X/13/11/1901) (cited 6 times) - Thomas, C.; Shilton, S.; Thomas, C.; Iye, C.M.; MartĂ­nez-PĂ©rez, G.Z. COVID-19 self-testing, a way to “live side by side with the coronavirus”: Results from a qualitative study in Indonesia. *PLOS Global Public Health* **2022**, 2, e0000514. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000514)\] (cited 3 times) - Al-Hindawi, A.; AlDallal, U.; Waly, Y.; Hussain, M.; Shelig, M.; Saleh ElMitwalli, O.; Deen, G.; Henari, F. An Exploration of Nanoparticle-Based Diagnostic Approaches for Coronaviruses: SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. *Nanomaterials* **2022**, 12, 3550. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nano12203550)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2079-4991/12/20/3550) (cited 9 times) - Ma, X.; Xu, J.; Zhou, F.; Ye, J.; Yang, D.; Wang, H.; Wang, P.; Li, M. Recent advances in PCR-free nucleic acid detection for SARS-COV-2. *Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology* **2022**, 10, 999358. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.999358)\] (cited 2 times) - Jain, S.; Bhowmick, A.; Pandey, A.K. A rapid One-Pot RNA isolation method for simplified clinical detection of SARS-COV-2 infection in India. *Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology* **2022**, 12, 962057. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.962057)\] - de la Fuente, J. Art–science multidisciplinary collaborations to address the scientific challenges posed by COVID-19. *Annals of Medicine* **2022**, 54, 2534. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2123557)\] (cited 4 times) - Veramuthu, V.; Munajat, I.; Islam, M.A.; Mohd, E.F.; Sulaiman, A.R. Prevalence of Avascular Necrosis Following Surgical Treatments in Unstable Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (SCFE): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Children* **2022**, 9, 1374. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children9091374)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9067/9/9/1374) (cited 4 times) - Stokes, W.; Berenger, B.M.; Venner, A.A.; Deslandes, V.; Shaw, J.L.V. Point of care molecular and antigen detection tests for COVID-19: current status and future prospects. *Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics* **2022**, 22, 797. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14737159.2022.2122712)\] (cited 7 times) - Xie, J.-W.; He, Y.; Zheng, Y.-W.; Wang, M.; Lin, Y.; Lin, L.-R. Diagnostic accuracy of rapid antigen test for SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 166,943 suspected COVID-19 patients. *Microbiological Research* **2022**, 265, 127185. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2022.127185)\] (cited 20 times) - Alkaffas, M.; Al-Kaffas, M..; Hatahet, S..; Katz, M..; Chahin, A..; Elhamamsy, S.. Comparing Rapid Ag Test and PCR in SARS-CoV-2 Management in Rural Egypt. *Journal of Pure and Applied Microbiology* **2022**, 16, 2110. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.22207/JPAM.16.3.67)\] - Samsunder, N.; de Vos, M.; Ngcapu, S.; Giandhari, J.; Lewis, L.; Kharsany, A.B.M.; Cawood, C.; de Oliveira, T.; Karim, Q.A.; Karim, S.A.; Naidoo, K.; Escadafal, C.; Sivro, A. Clinical Evaluation of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Rapid Antigen Tests During the Omicron Wave in South Africa. *The Journal of Infectious Diseases* **2022**, 226, 1412. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiac333)\] (cited 8 times) - Sayabovorn, N.; Phisalprapa, P.; Srivanichakorn, W.; Washirasaksiri, C.; Auesomwang, C.; Sitasuwan, T.; Tinmanee, R.; Chayakulkeeree, M.; Phoompoung, P.; Mayurasakorn, K.; Sookrung, N.; Tungtrongchitr, A.; Wanitphakdeedecha, R.; Muangman, S.; Senawong, S.; Tangjittipokin, W.; Sanpawitayakul, G.; Woradetsittichai, D.; Nimitpunya, P.; Kositamongkol, C.; Nopmaneejumruslers, C.; Vamvanij, V.; Chaisathaphol, T. Early diagnosis by antigen test kit and early treatment by antiviral therapy: An ambulatory management strategy during COVID-19 crisis in Thailand. *Medicine* **2022**, 101, e29888. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000029888)\] (cited 3 times) - Sumari, S.N.; Mat Zin, N.A.; Wan Ismail, W.F.; Islam, M.A. Global Prevalence and Risk of Local Recurrence Following Cryosurgery of Giant Cell Tumour of Bone: A Meta-Analysis. *Cancers* **2022**, 14, 3338. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14143338)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/14/3338) (cited 4 times) - Giberti, I.; Costa, E.; Domnich, A.; Ricucci, V.; De Pace, V.; Garzillo, G.; Guarona, G.; Icardi, G. High Diagnostic Accuracy of a Novel Lateral Flow Assay for the Point-of-Care Detection of SARS-CoV-2. *Biomedicines* **2022**, 10, 1558. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10071558)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2227-9059/10/7/1558) (cited 3 times) - Kim, J.; Sung, H.; Lee, H.; Kim, J.-S.; Shin, S.; Jeong, S.; Choi, M.; Lee, H.-J. Clinical Performance of Rapid and Point-of-Care Antigen Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Viruses* **2022**, 14, 1479. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/v14071479)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/14/7/1479) (cited 17 times) - Ruiz-Vega, G.; Soler, M.; Estevez, M.C.; Ramirez-Priego, P.; Pazos, M.D.; Noriega, M.A.; Margolles, Y.; FrancĂ©s-GĂłmez, C.; Geller, R.; Matusali, G.; Colavita, F.; di Caro, A.; Casasnovas, J.M.; FernĂĄndez, L.A.; Lechuga, L.M. Rapid and direct quantification of the SARS-CoV-2 virus with an ultrasensitive nanobody-based photonic nanosensor. *Sensors & Diagnostics* **2022**, 1, 983. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/D2SD00082B)\] (cited 17 times) - Tsao, J.; Kussman, A.L.; Costales, C.; Pinsky, B.A.; Abrams, G.D.; Hwang, C.E. Accuracy of Rapid Antigen vs Reverse Transcriptase–Polymerase Chain Reaction Testing for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in College Athletes During Prevalence of the Omicron Variant. *JAMA Network Open* **2022**, 5, e2217234. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.17234)\] (cited 15 times) - Tapari, A.; Braliou, G.G.; Papaefthimiou, M.; Mavriki, H.; Kontou, P.I.; Nikolopoulos, G.K.; Bagos, P.G. Performance of Antigen Detection Tests for SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Diagnostics* **2022**, 12, 1388. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12061388)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/6/1388) (cited 25 times) - Szeghy, R.E.; Stute, N.L.; Province, V.M.; Augenreich, M.A.; Stickford, J.L.; Stickford, A.S.L.; Ratchford, S.M. Six-month longitudinal tracking of arterial stiffness and blood pressure in young adults following SARS-CoV-2 infection. *Journal of Applied Physiology* **2022**, 132, 1297. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00793.2021)\] (cited 27 times) - Keskin, A.U.; Ciragil, P.; Topkaya, A.E. Clinical Accuracy of Instrument-Read SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Diagnostic Tests (Ag-IRRDTs). *International Journal of Microbiology* **2022**, 2022, 1. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/9489067)\] (cited 4 times) - Jamiruddin, M.R.; Meghla, B.A.; Islam, D.Z.; Tisha, T.A.; Khandker, S.S.; Khondoker, M.U.; Haq, M.A.; Adnan, N.; Haque, M. Microfluidics Technology in SARS-CoV-2 Diagnosis and Beyond: A Systematic Review. *Life* **2022**, 12, 649. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12050649)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/12/5/649) (cited 23 times) - Yang, Y.-P.; Huang, L.-L.; Pan, S.-J.; Xu, D.; Jiesisibieke, Z.L.; Tung, T.-H. False-positivity results in rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2: an umbrella review of meta-analyses and systematic reviews. *Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy* **2022**, 20, 1005. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2022.2070152)\] (cited 6 times) - Pandey, S.; Poudel, A.; Karki, D.; Thapa, J. Diagnostic accuracy of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for diagnosis of COVID-19 in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. *PLOS Global Public Health* **2022**, 2, e0000358. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000358)\] (cited 5 times) - Rahman, T.; Ibtehaz, N.; Khandakar, A.; Hossain, M.S.A.; Mekki, Y.M.S.; Ezeddin, M.; Bhuiyan, E.H.; Ayari, M.A.; Tahir, A.; Qiblawey, Y.; Mahmud, S.; Zughaier, S.M.; Abbas, T.; Al-Maadeed, S.; Chowdhury, M.E.H. QUCoughScope: An Intelligent Application to Detect COVID-19 Patients Using Cough and Breath Sounds. *Diagnostics* **2022**, 12, 920. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12040920)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/4/920) (cited 24 times) - Kessler, H.H.; PrĂŒller, F.; Hardt, M.; Stelzl, E.; Föderl-Höbenreich, E.; Pailer, S.; Lueger, A.; Kreuzer, P.; Zatloukal, K.; Herrmann, M. Identification of contagious SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals by Roche’s Rapid Antigen Test. *Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)* **2022**, 60, 778. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2021-1276)\] (cited 10 times) - Myers, R.; Ruskiewicz, D.; Meister, A.; Sukhinder, A.K.; Bartolomeu, C.; Thomas, P.; Lam, S. Breath collection protocol for SARS-CoV-2 testing in an ambulatory setting. *Journal of Breath Research* **2022**, 16, 027105. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1752-7163/ac4e2c)\] (cited 8 times) - Promlek, T.; Thanunchai, M.; Phumisantiphong, U.; Hansirisathit, T.; Phuttanu, C.; Dongphooyao, S.; Thongsopa, W.; Nuchnoi, P. Performance of colorimetric reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification as a diagnostic tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the fourth wave of COVID-19 in Thailand. *International Journal of Infectious Diseases* **2022**, 116, 133. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2021.12.351)\] (cited 18 times) - Long, B.; Carius, B.M.; Chavez, S.; Liang, S.Y.; Brady, W.J.; Koyfman, A.; Gottlieb, M. Clinical update on COVID-19 for the emergency clinician: Presentation and evaluation. *The American Journal of Emergency Medicine* **2022**, 54, 46. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2022.01.028)\] (cited 211 times) - Khalid, M.F.; Selvam, K.; Jeffry, A.J.N.; Salmi, M.F.; Najib, M.A.; Norhayati, M.N.; Aziah, I. Performance of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19 Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Diagnostics* **2022**, 12, 110. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010110)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/12/1/110) (cited 86 times) - GĂ©rardin, P.; Maillard, O.; Bruneau, L.; Accot, F.; Legrand, F.; Poubeau, P.; Manaquin, R.; Andry, F.; Bertolotti, A.; Levin, C. Differentiating COVID-19 and dengue from other febrile illnesses in co-epidemics: Development and internal validation of COVIDENGUE scores. *Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease* **2022**, 45, 102232. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmaid.2021.102232)\] (cited 3 times) - Pyar, K.P.; Su, K.K..; Wunna, K..; Thant, M..; Myat, K..; Aung, A..; Htet Aung, Z.N..; Maung, N.L..; Kyaw, A.P..; Zaw Oo, M.L..; Tun, K.Z..; Ko Aung, K.K..; Thu, K..; Tun, T.S..; Oo, N.Y..; Latt, C.N..; Tun, T.H..; Myint, S.T..; Oo, A.P..; Ko Min, W.K..; Win, K.K..; Yan, H.W..; Oo , T.M..; Tin, W.M.. Accuracy of Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test in Nasopharyngeal Swab: Clinical Impression Matters. *Journal of Biomedical Research & Environmental Sciences* **2021**, 2, 929. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.37871/jbres1334)\] - Lam, A.H.-Y.; Leung, K.-Y.; Zhang, R.; Liu, D.; Fan, Y.; Tam, A.R.; Yip, C.C.-Y.; Cheng, V.C.-C.; Yuen, K.-Y.; Hung, I.F.-N.; Chan, K.-H. Evaluation of an Antigen Detection Rapid Diagnostic Test for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Clinical Samples. *COVID* **2021**, 1, 775. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/covid1040062)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2673-8112/1/4/62) (cited 3 times) - Lam, A.H.-Y.; Cai, J.-P.; Leung, K.-Y.; Zhang, R.-R.; Liu, D.; Fan, Y.; Tam, A.R.; Cheng, V.C.-C.; To, K.K.-W.; Yuen, K.-Y.; Hung, I.F.-N.; Chan, K.-H. In-House Immunofluorescence Assay for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antigens in Cells from Nasopharyngeal Swabs as a Diagnostic Method for COVID-19. *Diagnostics* **2021**, 11, 2346. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122346)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/11/12/2346) (cited 3 times) - Khandker, S.S.; Godman, B.; Jawad, M.I.; Meghla, B.A.; Tisha, T.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Haq, M.A.; Charan, J.; Talukder, A.A.; Azmuda, N.; Sharmin, S.; Jamiruddin, M.R.; Haque, M.; Adnan, N. A Systematic Review on COVID-19 Vaccine Strategies, Their Effectiveness, and Issues. *Vaccines* **2021**, 9, 1387. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9121387)\] [Open Access on mdpi.com](http://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/12/1387) (cited 60 times) - Mazlan, M.Z.; Mohamad, I.; Deris, Z.Z. Missed by RTK, caught by PCR, unimagined chest Radiograph. *Visual Journal of Emergency Medicine* **2021**, 25, 101194. \[[CrossRef](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.visj.2021.101194)\] ### Article Access Statistics [Journal Statistics](https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcm/stats) Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view. [Effect of an Acute Resistance Training Bout and Long-Term Resistance Training Program on Arterial Stiffness: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisPrevious](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3492) [Cataract Surgery in Elderly Subjects with Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia in Prolonged Treatment with StatinsNext](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3494) [![X](https://mdpi-res.com/data/x-square-filled.svg)](https://x.com/JCM_MDPI)[![Facebook](https://mdpi-res.com/data/facebook-square-filled.svg)](https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100091466336106)[![LinkedIn](https://mdpi-res.com/data/linkedin-square-filled.svg)](https://www.linkedin.com/company/journal-of-clinical-medicine-jcm) J. Clin. Med. - ISSN 2077-0383 [Imprint](https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcm/imprint) RSS Download RSS feed [Download Flyer](https://mdpi-res.com/journals/93/flyer.pdf) ### Discover - [Articles](https://www.mdpi.com/search) - [Journals](https://www.mdpi.com/about/journals) - [Research Awards](https://www.mdpi.com/awards) - [Open Access Policy](https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess) ### Services - [Author Services](https://www.mdpi.com/authors/english) - [Conferences](https://www.mdpi.com/partnerships/conferences) - [Societies](https://www.mdpi.com/societies) - [Products & Solutions](https://www.mdpi.com/about/products) ### Guidelines - [For Authors](https://www.mdpi.com/authors) - [For Reviewers](https://www.mdpi.com/reviewers) - [For Editors](https://www.mdpi.com/editors) - [For Librarians](https://www.mdpi.com/librarians) ### Company - [About Us](https://www.mdpi.com/about) - [Careers](https://careers.mdpi.com/) - [Blog](https://blog.mdpi.com/) ### Support - [Pay an Invoice](https://www.mdpi.com/about/payment) - [Processing Charges](https://www.mdpi.com/apc) - [Discount Policy](https://www.mdpi.com/authors#Discounts_on_APCs) - [Contact Us](https://www.mdpi.com/support) [![MDPI](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=56,h=30/https://mdpi-res.com/data/mdpi-logo-black.svg)![MDPI](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=70,h=56/https://mdpi-res.com/data/mdpi-logo-black.svg)](https://www.mdpi.com/) [![Facebook](https://mdpi-res.com/data/facebook.svg)](https://www.facebook.com/MDPIOpenAccessPublishing)[![LinkedIn](https://mdpi-res.com/data/linkedin.svg)](https://www.linkedin.com/company/mdpi/)[![Twitter](https://mdpi-res.com/data/x.svg)](https://twitter.com/MDPIOpenAccess)[![YouTube](https://mdpi-res.com/data/youtube.svg)](https://www.youtube.com/@MDPIOA) © 2026 MDPI AG (Basel, Switzerland) [Terms and Conditions](https://www.mdpi.com/about/terms-and-conditions)[Terms of Use](https://www.mdpi.com/about/termsofuse)[Privacy Policy](https://www.mdpi.com/about/privacy)[Accessibility](https://www.mdpi.com/accessibility) Privacy Settings Disclaimer [Referenced in **1** policy sources](https://www.altmetric.com/details.php?domain=www.mdpi.com&citation_id=111591942&tab=policy-documents) [Posted by **12** X users](https://www.altmetric.com/details.php?domain=www.mdpi.com&citation_id=111591942&tab=twitter) [Referenced in **1** Wikipedia pages](https://www.altmetric.com/details.php?domain=www.mdpi.com&citation_id=111591942&tab=wikipedia) [Reddited by **5**](https://www.altmetric.com/details.php?domain=www.mdpi.com&citation_id=111591942&tab=reddit) **128** readers on Mendeley [See more details](https://www.altmetric.com/details.php?domain=www.mdpi.com&citation_id=111591942)
Readable Markdown
- Article - ![Open Access](https://mdpi-res.com/cdn-cgi/image/w=14,h=14/https://mdpi-res.com/data/open-access.svg) 7 August 2021 , , , and 1 Gonoshasthaya-RNA Molecular Diagnostic and Research Center, Dhanmondi, Dhaka 1205, Bangladesh 2 Department of Medical Microbiology and Parasitology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia 3 Medical Microbiology Laboratory, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia 4 Department of Haematology, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Kelantan, Malaysia ## Abstract Early diagnosis is still as crucial as the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. As RT-PCR sometimes is not feasible in developing nations or rural areas, health professionals may use a rapid antigen test (RAT) to lessen the load of diagnosis. However, the efficacy of RAT is yet to be investigated thoroughly. Hence, we tried to evaluate the overall performance of RAT in SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Based on our PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42021231432), we searched online databases (i.e., PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science) and analysed overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT along with study quality, publication bias, heterogeneity and more. The overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT were detected as 99.4% (95% CI: 99.1–99.8; I2 = 90%) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.8–75.9; I2 = 98%), respectively. In subgroup analyses, nasopharyngeal specimens and symptomatic patient’s samples were more sensitive in RAT, while cycle threshold (Ct) values were found to have an inverse relationship with sensitivity. In the European and American populations, RAT showed better performance. Although the sensitivity of RAT is yet to be improved, it could still be an alternative in places with poor laboratory set up. Nevertheless, the negative samples of RAT can be re-tested using RT-PCR to reduce false negative results. ## 1\. Introduction Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), characterised mainly by fever, cough, sore throat, fatigue, joint and muscle pain and loss of smell and taste \[1,2,3,4,5\]. It was first identified in Hubei province in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and until now, it continues to be a significant health issue worldwide. Because there is no specific therapy or medication, early and accurate diagnosis is critical in preventing the spread of the disease \[6,7\]. In vitro diagnostics have long been recognised as a valuable tool for outbreak control and patient care \[8\]. The current gold standard diagnostic test for laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT); reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to be specific \[9\]. The advantage this has over other tests is its high sensitivity due to the nucleic acid amplification step while also having a high specificity due to the specific primers used. This is consistent with its purpose at referral centres, which is to advise clinical care of patients. However, since it can take several hours to obtain results from RT-PCR, it may be inappropriate to use during an emergency. It also requires costly technology and competent workers, both of which may not be accessible in remote health clinics, particularly in underdeveloped countries. Rapid antigen test (RAT) kits have emerged as an important alternative tool to aid in the clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. RAT is based on immunochromatography, which employs antibodies spotted onto nitrocellulose membranes that interact with specific antigens from the patient sample. The antigen–antibody interaction can be visualised manually or by using an immunofluorescence machine reader. For the diagnosis of COVID-19, the target analyte is often the virus’ nucleocapsid protein. A similar strategy has been used for the rapid diagnosis of HIV, malaria, influenza and other diseases \[9\]. It is a reasonably inexpensive and simple test with quick results that may be used for point-of-care testing \[10\]. The advantage of RAT is that the test is more accessible to patients. It also enables appropriate infection control measures to be instituted earlier which is important in a pandemic \[10,11\]. However, a negative RAT result cannot rule out COVID-19 infection \[12\]. Patients with typical clinical presentation or close contacts of COVID-19 cases should undergo repeat testing \[12,13\]. For diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, the World Health Organisation has recommended that a RAT kit needs to meet a minimum performance requirement of at least 80% sensitivity and 97% specificity compared with a NAAT reference assay to be used \[14\]. Studies regarding the diagnostic accuracy of RAT have produced a wide range of sensitivity. The varied results may be due to the various study designs, manufacturer of the RAT kits, patient selection, types of specimens and the phase of illness at the point of sample collection. While research and development of RAT to detect SARS-CoV-2 continue, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide an update on the diagnostic accuracy in terms of estimating the specificity and sensitivity of RAT kits in patients with suspected COVID-19. ## 2\. Methods #### 2\.1. Study Protocol and Guideline Based on the current literature, this systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic accuracy of the available RAT kits for COVID-19 diagnosis was undertaken according to the PRISMA guideline \[15\]. The protocol of this study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021231432). #### 2\.2. Eligibility Criteria As the objective was to investigate the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the available RAT kits detecting SARS-CoV-2, we included studies in which RAT kits were used to identify SARS-CoV-2 to confirm COVID-19. Original studies without restricting study design or language were included. Review articles, opinions, case reports, news, press releases, blogs and data from websites were not considered eligible. #### 2\.3. Search Strategies Based on the eligibility criteria, we searched online databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify studies of our interest published between 1 January 2020 and 13 January 2021. The following keywords were used to search different databases: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, coronavirus, nCoV, antigen, detection, diagnostic, diagnosis, test, testing, assay, assays and combined with appropriate Boolean operators ([Table S1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). Additionally, the reference lists of the included studies were also reviewed to identify any potentially eligible studies. EndNote X8 software (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA) was used to identify and exclude duplicate studies. #### 2\.4. Study Selection Three authors (S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.) independently screened the original pool of papers, then assessed their eligibility to be included in this meta-analysis using title, abstract, and full-text evaluation. Disagreements about whether a study should be included or excluded were discussed with the other authors (M.A.I. and Z.Z.D.) and resolved with acceptable consensus. #### 2\.5. Data Extraction Three authors (S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.) independently undertook the data extraction, and two authors (M.A.I. and Z.Z.D.) validated it. Initially, the data of the total number of positive and negative specimens confirmed by a reference standard followed by the number of positive and negative results of those same specimens were evaluated through RAT kits and they were extracted from each of the eligible studies. The major characteristics of the studies including the Study ID (last name of the first author and year of publication), location, total number of subjects, percentage of female subjects, the mean or median age of the participants, type of participants, specimen types, the test method of RAT kit used, percentages of positive samples detected by the reference standard (RT-PCR), ranges of Ct values of the reference standard and the manufacturer of the RAT kits were documented. #### 2\.6. Quality Assessment Two authors (S.S.K. and M.A.I.) independently assessed the quality of the included studies following the diagnostic test accuracy quality assessment tool of the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). To resolve the discrepancies, all authors took part in the discussion and resolved with consensus. If the total score was ≀49, 50–69, or ≄70%, the studies were classed as low-quality (high-risk of bias), moderate-quality (moderate-risk of bias), or high-quality (low risk of bias) \[16\]. To detect publication bias, funnel plots were constructed, and the Egger’s test was performed. #### 2\.7. Data Analyses A random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was used to analyse the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of the RAT kit to detect COVID-19. I2 statistics were used to analyse heterogeneity among the included studies (I2 \> 75% indicating substantial heterogeneity), followed by Cochran’s Q test to determine the significance of the heterogeneity (p \< 0.05 was considered statistically significant). Furthermore, a Galbraith plot was generated to determine the outlier studies. #### 2\.8. Subgroup and Sensitivity Analyses Subgroup analyses were undertaken to investigate sensitivity and specificity based on symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, days of symptom onset, types of specimen, Ct values, countries, continents and manufacturers of RAT. To investigate the robustness of results and the possible source of heterogeneity, sensitivity analyses were performed through strategies such as excluding small studies (\<100), excluding low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model, and excluding outlier studies. The analyses and plots were constructed by using the metaprop codes in the meta (version 4.15-1) and metafor (version 2.4-0) packages of R (version 3.6.3) in RStudio (RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA, USA) (version 1.3.1093). ## 3\. Results #### 3\.1. Study Selection Primarily, based on the search strategies, a total of 1201 published articles were identified from the online databases. During the initial screening process, 872 articles including review articles (n = 31), case reports (n = 7), articles that included non-human subjects (n = 18), editorials, letters and comment (n = 65) and duplicate studies (n = 751) were excluded. From the remaining 329 studies, 300 studies did not comply with the objective of this meta-analysis (irrelevant to the objective of the meta-analysis, repetitive studies, protocols only or missing data of interest); hence regarded as ineligible. The remaining 29 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were finally included in this meta-analysis ([Figure 1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f001)). **Figure 1.** PRISMA flow diagram of study selection. #### 3\.2. Characteristics of the Included Studies A total of 17,171 COVID-19 suspects, including RT-PCR-positive and negative participants who were further tested in RAT, were reported in this meta-analysis. Different types of specimen (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, nasal swab, sputum, throat swab or endotracheal aspirates) were taken from suspected symptomatic or asymptomatic participants. The RT-PCR-positive participants had a wide range of Ct values. Although a total of 15 different RAT kits were assessed from 13 different manufacturers, the RAT test methods were based on either immunochromatographic (ICG) assay or fluorescence immunoassay (FIA). The studies were carried out in several countries encompassing five continents. [Table 1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t001) shows the detailed features of the studies we included. **Table 1.** Major characteristics of the included studies. #### 3\.3. Quality Assessment and Publication Bias The quality of each of the included studies was extensively examined using the JBI diagnostic accuracy checklist where the highest and lowest quality scores of the included studies were recorded as 88.8% (five studies) and 55.5% (two studies), respectively. Overall, there were no low-quality studies, 26.6% of high-quality, and 72.4% of moderate-quality studies ([Table S2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). There was no indication of substantial publication bias in the funnel plots evaluating the specificity and sensitivity of RAT kits to confirm SARS-CoV-2 ([Figure 2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f002)). **Figure 2.** Funnel plots representing no evidence of significant publication bias estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. #### 3\.4. Meta-Analysis The overall pooled specificity and sensitivity of RAT were 99.4% (95% CI: 99.1–99.8; I2 = 90%) and 68.4% (95% CI: 60.8–75.9; I2 = 98%), respectively ([Figure 3](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f003)). Four outlier studies \[20,33,38,44\] were identified using the Galbraith plot ([Figure 4](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-f004)). Except for the pooled specificity of subgroups based on specimen types (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab: 71.0% (95% CI: 14.1–100.1) and saliva: 80.7% (95% CI: 41.8–100.0)), the specificity did not vary in most of the subgroups and ranged between 99 and 100% ([Table 2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t002) and [Figure S1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). On the other hand, in subgroup analyses, the sensitivity for each subgroup was lower than the specificity. Each of the subgroups estimating the sensitivity had high levels of heterogeneity except for the subgroups defined by the onset of symptoms (\<5 and \>5 days; I2 = 0%) and Ct values (Ct values ≀20 and 36–40; I2 = 0%). When compared with asymptomatic patients (54.5%), the sensitivity of RAT kits was higher in symptomatic patients (78.5%). The sensitivity of the nasopharyngeal swab was higher (70.1%) than that of saliva (50.4%) and throat swab or saliva (38.4%). The CT indicates the number of cycles needed for the fluorescence signals to reach the threshold. Ct value for a particular gene (i.e., N, ORF, E, S or M) is inversely correlated with viral load in a targeted specimen \[45,46\]. Surprisingly, the sensitivity of RAT kits was shown to have an inverse relationship with the Ct values, which also corresponded with the sensitivity of subgroups based on the symptom onset days ([Table 2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t002) and [Figure S1](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). The sensitivity of RAT kits dropped to 15.1% and 16.5% when Ct values were 31–35 and 36–40, respectively. On the other hand, the RAT kits had a lower sensitivity when used in the African (56.4%) and Asian (65.0%) populations compared with the European (70.0%) and American populations (74.1%). Kits from different manufacturers exhibited various sensitivity. PanbioTM showed the highest sensitivity (75.1%) followed by Abbott BinaxNOWℱ (74.8%), Standardℱ (66.4%) and Biocredit (42.7%). **Figure 3.** Forest plots representing estimating of (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. **Figure 4.** Galbraith plots representing outlier studies estimating (**A**) specificity and (**B**) sensitivity of rapid antigen tests in confirming COVID-19. **Table 2.** Pooled specificity and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 detection using the rapid antigen test kit. #### 3\.5. Sensitivity Analyses To assess the range in outcomes, sensitivity analyses were performed removing small studies (n \< 100), low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model instead of a random-effects model, and omitting outlier studies. Surprisingly, the specificity of RAT kits for each of the sensitivity analysis results remained very constant when compared to the total pooled specificity (99.4%), ranging from 99.4% to 99.9% ([Table 3](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t003) and [Figure S2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). Using a fixed-effects model, the overall pooled sensitivity was enhanced to 79.9% as compared with the overall pooled sensitivity observed using the random-effects model (68.4%). However, when small (n \< 100) studies, low- and moderate-quality studies, and outlier studies were excluded, the sensitivity of RAT kits was found to be 62.0%, 69.8%, and 71.2%, respectively, which was close to the overall pooled sensitivity (68.4%) ([Table 3](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#jcm-10-03493-t003) and [Figure S2](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493)). **Table 3.** Sensitivity analyses. ## 4\. Discussion RT-PCR has been recognised as the diagnostic gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis to date; however, it has several drawbacks, including false-negative and false-positive findings \[47,48\]. The rate of false-negative results was estimated to be about 67% in the first 4–5 days following the onset of symptoms. \[48\]. On the other hand, the reasons behind the false-positive results were contamination during specimen collection, contamination of reagents, PCR amplicons, cross-contamination of the sample, and cross-reaction with other genetic materials or viruses \[47\]. Even in a cohort study, chest CT was found to be more sensitive (88%) as compared with the diagnostic result of RT-PCR (59%) \[49\]. Additionally, RT-PCR is costly and requires well-equipped laboratories \[47,48,50\]. More importantly, the release of RT-PCR results in many instances may take longer than expected due to high sample volumes and a lack of technical support, leading to delayed management of patients and control of outbreaks. As a result, an emphasis on developing RAT kits was necessary to close the diagnostic gaps. So far, several RAT kits have been developed by various manufacturers from multiple countries and evaluated independently by researchers. We observed that most of the RATs were developed based on either ICG assay or FIA. Although both the assays are generally based on the antibody–antigen interaction technique, for the detection, a signal generator (i.e., gold colloid) is used in ICG whereas a fluorescent molecule is bound to the detection antibody in FIA \[51,52,53\]. In this meta-analysis, we looked at the overall sensitivity and specificity of the available reported RAT kits. We found that although the overall pooled specificity (99.4%) was acceptable, the overall pooled sensitivity (68.4%) was not. Except in a few subgroups where there was a lot of heterogeneity across the studies, overall, the specificity did not differ substantially in the subgroup analysis. The study results, on the other hand, differed considerably when it came to assessing the sensitivity. Interestingly, the sensitivity of RAT kits for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients was 78.5% and 54.5%, respectively, indicating that RAT kits can identify both kinds of patient, albeit at a lower detection rate in the latter patient group. However, early detection is critical for RAT, as the sensitivity maintained at 82.0% when the symptom onset came after less than 5 days but dropped to 75.1% after five days. In the case of RT-PCR, a similar association between days of symptom onset and correct diagnosis had been reported \[48\]. This correlation was further justified when we analysed the correlation between Ct values and sensitivity. Previously, an analogous observation was investigated where a negative correlation of Ct values of RT-PCR and sensitivity in just one antigen kit for a specimen was identified \[54\]. When we checked the overall scenario with the studies we included, we found a similar inverse correlation of Ct values and sensitivity. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the higher Ct value (\>33) can be considered as a non-contagious stage \[55\] which can justify the usage of RAT kits. However, early diagnosis using RAT kits can be suggested according to these observations. Again, among different specimen types, the nasopharyngeal swab was identified to be the best for SARS-CoV-2 identification using RAT kits. A recent study also suggested that the nasopharyngeal swab is more sensitive (89%) as compared with saliva (72%) to detect SARS-CoV-2 which confirms our findings \[56\]. In the current study, when the RAT sensitivity to detect SARS-CoV-2 in people from various continents and nations was examined, it was demonstrated that the sensitivity of RAT in the population of Europe and America was higher as compared to that of Asia and Africa. Because most RAT kits are manufactured in European countries, China, and Korea, the sensitivity may have diminished in Asia and Africa owing to issues during RAT kit transportation. As reported earlier, a repetitive freeze-thaw process during transportation can change the behaviour of proteins used in RAT kits \[57\]. This was further justified when a study by Gupta et al. \[26\] from India exhibited a much higher sensitivity (81.8% (95% CI: 73.2–90.4)) and the RAT kit used in this study was in fact manufactured in India. Hence, based on our findings, it can be suggested that local manufacturers or inventors should be prioritised for the RAT kit development and utilisation. Further investigations are required to determine the correlation of different sample conditions such as transportation or storage with the sensitivity of RAT. Again, recent reports about different genetic and structural mutations of SARS-CoV-2 enhance the possibility to hamper the sensitivity of diagnostic tools \[58,59\]. Hence, researchers need to focus on the improvement of sensitivity of RAT without compromising the specificity to detect both the original and mutated variants of SARS-CoV-2. Results of this meta-analysis support the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19 that the sensitivity of RAT kits is highly correlated with viral load, symptoms, and the timing of the test in relation to the onset of symptoms \[60\]. This meta-analysis also shows that the sensitivity of RAT kits differs depending on the manufacturer and the country in which the kits are produced. ## 5\. Conclusions To summarise, the use of RAT kits is largely recommended for the early detection of patients suspected of having COVID-19, particularly in densely populated and isolated locations with limited resources and laboratory equipment. It may also be useful for prompt diagnosis in central city or rural areas. However, the negative RAT samples may need to be further analysed using molecular tests to confirm the results, particularly when the symptoms of COVID-19 are present. ## Supplementary Materials The following are available online at <https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm10163493/s1>, Table S1: Search strategies, Table S2: Quality assessment of the included studies, Figure S1: Subgroup analyses based on the presence of symptoms, symptom onset, specimen types, Ct values, continents, countries, and kit manufacturers estimating the pooled specificity (A-AA) and sensitivity (AB-BJ) using rapid antigen test kit to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, Figure S2: Sensitivity analyses excluding small studies (\<100), excluding low- or moderate-quality studies, using a fixed-effects model, and excluding outlier studies estimating polled specificity (A–D) and sensitivity (E–H) using a rapid antigen test kit to diagnose SARS-CoV-2. ## Author Contributions Conceptualization, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; methodology, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.; software, M.A.I.; validation, R.H.S., and M.A.I.; formal analysis, M.A.I.; investigation, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H. and R.H.S.; resources, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I.; data curation, S.S.K., N.H.H.N.H., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; writing—original draft preparation, S.S.K. and N.H.H.N.H.; writing—review and editing, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; visualization, R.H.S.; supervision, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I.; project administration, Z.Z.D., R.H.S. and M.A.I.; funding acquisition, Z.Z.D. and M.A.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. ## Funding This research was funded by the Universiti Sains Malaysia Research University Grant 1001/PPSP/8012382. ## Institutional Review Board Statement Not applicable. ## Informed Consent Statement Not applicable. ## Data Availability Statement The data presented in this study are available in the main text and [supplementary materials](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493#app1-jcm-10-03493). ## Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. ## References 1. Islam, M.A.; Kundu, S.; Alam, S.S.; Hossan, T.; Kamal, M.A.; Hassan, R. Prevalence and characteristics of fever in adult and paediatric patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis of 17515 patients. PLoS ONE **2021**, 16, e0249788. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+and+characteristics+of+fever+in+adult+and+paediatric+patients+with+coronavirus+disease+2019+\(COVID-19\):+A+systematic+review+and+meta-analysis+of+17515+patients&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Kundu,+S.&author=Alam,+S.S.&author=Hossan,+T.&author=Kamal,+M.A.&author=Hassan,+R.&publication_year=2021&journal=PLoS+ONE&volume=16&pages=e0249788&doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0249788)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249788)\] 2. Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Abdullah, B. Prevalence of Olfactory Dysfunction in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Meta-analysis of 27,492 Patients. Laryngoscope **2021**, 131, 865–878. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+of+Olfactory+Dysfunction+in+Coronavirus+Disease+2019+\(COVID-19\):+A+Meta-analysis+of+27,492+Patients&author=Saniasiaya,+J.&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Abdullah,+B.&publication_year=2021&journal=Laryngoscope&volume=131&pages=865%E2%80%93878&doi=10.1002/lary.29286)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1002/lary.29286)\] 3. Saniasiaya, J.; Islam, M.A.; Abdullah, B. Prevalence and Characteristics of Taste Disorders in Cases of COVID-19: A Meta-analysis of 29,349 Patients. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. **2020**, 165, 33–42. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+and+Characteristics+of+Taste+Disorders+in+Cases+of+COVID-19:+A+Meta-analysis+of+29,349+Patients&author=Saniasiaya,+J.&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Abdullah,+B.&publication_year=2020&journal=Otolaryngol.+Head+Neck+Surg.&volume=165&pages=33%E2%80%9342&doi=10.1177/0194599820981018&pmid=33320033)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1177/0194599820981018)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33320033)\] 4. Islam, M.A.; Alam, S.S.; Kundu, S.; Hossan, T.; Kamal, M.A.; Cavestro, C. Prevalence of Headache in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 14,275 Patients. Front. Neurol. **2020**, 11, 562634. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Prevalence+of+Headache+in+Patients+With+Coronavirus+Disease+2019+\(COVID-19\):+A+Systematic+Review+and+Meta-Analysis+of+14,275+Patients&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Alam,+S.S.&author=Kundu,+S.&author=Hossan,+T.&author=Kamal,+M.A.&author=Cavestro,+C.&publication_year=2020&journal=Front.+Neurol.&volume=11&pages=562634&doi=10.3389/fneur.2020.562634&pmid=33329305)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.562634)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33329305)\] 5. Guan, W.-J.; Ni, Z.-Y.; Hu, Y.; Liang, W.-H.; Ou, C.-Q.; He, J.-X.; Liu, L.; Shan, H.; Lei, C.-L.; Hui, D.S. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N. Engl. J. Med. **2020**, 382, 1708–1720. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Clinical+characteristics+of+coronavirus+disease+2019+in+China&author=Guan,+W.-J.&author=Ni,+Z.-Y.&author=Hu,+Y.&author=Liang,+W.-H.&author=Ou,+C.-Q.&author=He,+J.-X.&author=Liu,+L.&author=Shan,+H.&author=Lei,+C.-L.&author=Hui,+D.S.&publication_year=2020&journal=N.+Engl.+J.+Med.&volume=382&pages=1708%E2%80%931720&doi=10.1056/NEJMoa2002032&pmid=32109013)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32109013)\] 6. Pfefferle, S.; Reucher, S.; Nörz, D.; LĂŒtgehetmann, M. Evaluation of a quantitative RT-PCR assay for the detection of the emerging coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 using a high throughput system. Eurosurveillance **2020**, 25, 2000152. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+quantitative+RT-PCR+assay+for+the+detection+of+the+emerging+coronavirus+SARS-CoV-2+using+a+high+throughput+system&author=Pfefferle,+S.&author=Reucher,+S.&author=N%C3%B6rz,+D.&author=L%C3%BCtgehetmann,+M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Eurosurveillance&volume=25&pages=2000152&doi=10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.9.2000152&pmid=32156329)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.9.2000152)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32156329)\] \[[Green Version](https://www.eurosurveillance.org/deliver/fulltext/eurosurveillance/25/9/eurosurv-25-9-4.pdf?itemId=/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.9.2000152&mimeType=pdf&containerItemId=content/eurosurveillance)\] 7. LeBlanc, J.J.; Gubbay, J.B.; Li, Y.; Needle, R.; Arneson, S.R.; Marcino, D.; Charest, H.; Desnoyers, G.; Dust, K.; Fattouh, R. Real-time PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 detection in Canadian laboratories. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 128, 104433. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Real-time+PCR-based+SARS-CoV-2+detection+in+Canadian+laboratories&author=LeBlanc,+J.J.&author=Gubbay,+J.B.&author=Li,+Y.&author=Needle,+R.&author=Arneson,+S.R.&author=Marcino,+D.&author=Charest,+H.&author=Desnoyers,+G.&author=Dust,+K.&author=Fattouh,+R.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=128&pages=104433&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104433&pmid=32405254)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104433)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32405254)\] 8. US Food and Drug Administration. In Vitro Diagnostics EUAs. Updated January 14. Available online: <https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/vitro-diagnostics-euas> (accessed on 21 April 2021). 9. D’Cruz, R.J.; Currier, A.W.; Sampson, V.B. Laboratory testing methods for novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Front. Cell Dev. Biol. **2020**, 8, 468. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Laboratory+testing+methods+for+novel+severe+acute+respiratory+syndrome-coronavirus-2+\(SARS-CoV-2\)&author=D%E2%80%99Cruz,+R.J.&author=Currier,+A.W.&author=Sampson,+V.B.&publication_year=2020&journal=Front.+Cell+Dev.+Biol.&volume=8&pages=468&doi=10.3389/fcell.2020.00468&pmid=32582718)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2020.00468)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32582718)\] 10. Torres, I.; Poujois, S.; Albert, E.; Álvarez, G.; Colomina, J.; Navarro, D. Point-of-care evaluation of a rapid antigen test (CLINITESTⓇ Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test) for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. J. Infect. **2021**, 82, 11–12. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Point-of-care+evaluation+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+\(CLINITEST%E2%93%87+Rapid+COVID-19+Antigen+Test\)+for+diagnosis+of+SARS-CoV-2+infection+in+symptomatic+and+asymptomatic+individuals&author=Torres,+I.&author=Poujois,+S.&author=Albert,+E.&author=%C3%81lvarez,+G.&author=Colomina,+J.&author=Navarro,+D.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=11%E2%80%9312&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2021.02.010&pmid=33587922)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2021.02.010)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33587922)\] 11. Peeling, R.W.; Olliaro, P.L.; Boeras, D.I.; Fongwen, N. Scaling up COVID-19 rapid antigen tests: Promises and challenges. Lancet Infect. Dis. **2021**. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Scaling+up+COVID-19+rapid+antigen+tests:+Promises+and+challenges&author=Peeling,+R.W.&author=Olliaro,+P.L.&author=Boeras,+D.I.&author=Fongwen,+N.&publication_year=2021&journal=Lancet+Infect.+Dis.&doi=10.1016/S1473-3099\(21\)00048-7)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099\(21\)00048-7)\] 12. Albert, E.; Torres, I.; Bueno, F.; Huntley, D.; Molla, E.; FernĂĄndez-Fuentes, M.Á.; MartĂ­nez, M.; Poujois, S.; ForquĂ©, L.; Valdivia, A. Field evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device) for COVID-19 diagnosis in primary healthcare centres. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2020**, 27, 7–10. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Field+evaluation+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+\(Panbio%E2%84%A2+COVID-19+Ag+Rapid+Test+Device\)+for+COVID-19+diagnosis+in+primary+healthcare+centres&author=Albert,+E.&author=Torres,+I.&author=Bueno,+F.&author=Huntley,+D.&author=Molla,+E.&author=Fern%C3%A1ndez-Fuentes,+M.%C3%81.&author=Mart%C3%ADnez,+M.&author=Poujois,+S.&author=Forqu%C3%A9,+L.&author=Valdivia,+A.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=7%E2%80%9310&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.11.004)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.11.004)\] 13. Mina, M.J.; Parker, R.; Larremore, D.B. Rethinking Covid-19 test sensitivity—A strategy for containment. N. Engl. J. Med. **2020**, 383, e120. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rethinking+Covid-19+test+sensitivity%E2%80%94A+strategy+for+containment&author=Mina,+M.J.&author=Parker,+R.&author=Larremore,+D.B.&publication_year=2020&journal=N.+Engl.+J.+Med.&volume=383&pages=e120&doi=10.1056/NEJMp2025631)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2025631)\] 14. World Health Organization. Antigen-Detection in the Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Using Rapid Immunoassays: Interim Guidance. 11 September 2020. Available online: <https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/antigen-detection-in-the-diagnosis-of-sars-cov-2infection-using-rapid-immunoassays> (accessed on 28 April 2021). 15. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Group, P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. **2009**, 6, e1000097. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Preferred+reporting+items+for+systematic+reviews+and+meta-analyses:+The+PRISMA+statement&author=Moher,+D.&author=Liberati,+A.&author=Tetzlaff,+J.&author=Altman,+D.G.&author=Group,+P.&publication_year=2009&journal=PLoS+Med.&volume=6&pages=e1000097&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097)\] \[[Green Version](https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097&type=printable)\] 16. Chia, Y.C.; Islam, M.A.; Hider, P.; Woon, P.Y.; Johan, M.F.; Hassan, R.; Ramli, M. The Prevalence of TET2 Gene Mutations in Patients with BCR-ABL-Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers **2021**, 13, 3078. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The+Prevalence+of+TET2+Gene+Mutations+in+Patients+with+BCR-ABL-Negative+Myeloproliferative+Neoplasms+\(MPN\):+A+Systematic+Review+and+Meta-Analysis&author=Chia,+Y.C.&author=Islam,+M.A.&author=Hider,+P.&author=Woon,+P.Y.&author=Johan,+M.F.&author=Hassan,+R.&author=Ramli,+M.&publication_year=2021&journal=Cancers&volume=13&pages=3078&doi=10.3390/cancers13123078)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13123078)\] 17. Abdelrazik, A.M.; Elshafie, S.M.; Abdelaziz, H.M. Potential Use of Antigen-Based Rapid Test for SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Specimens in Low-Resource Settings in Egypt for Symptomatic Patients and High-Risk Contacts. Lab. Med. **2020**, 52, 46–49. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Potential+Use+of+Antigen-Based+Rapid+Test+for+SARS-CoV-2+in+Respiratory+Specimens+in+Low-Resource+Settings+in+Egypt+for+Symptomatic+Patients+and+High-Risk+Contacts&author=Abdelrazik,+A.M.&author=Elshafie,+S.M.&author=Abdelaziz,+H.M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Lab.+Med.&volume=52&pages=46%E2%80%9349&doi=10.1093/labmed/lmaa104&pmid=33283230)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmaa104)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33283230)\] 18. AgullĂł, V.; FernĂĄndez-GonzĂĄlez, M.; de la Tabla, V.O.; Gonzalo-JimĂ©nez, N.; GarcĂ­a, J.A.; MasiĂĄ, M.; GutiĂ©rrez, F. Evaluation of the rapid antigen test Panbio COVID-19 in saliva and nasal swabs in a population-based point-of-care study. J. Infect. **2020**, 82, 186–230. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+the+rapid+antigen+test+Panbio+COVID-19+in+saliva+and+nasal+swabs+in+a+population-based+point-of-care+study&author=Agull%C3%B3,+V.&author=Fern%C3%A1ndez-Gonz%C3%A1lez,+M.&author=de+la+Tabla,+V.O.&author=Gonzalo-Jim%C3%A9nez,+N.&author=Garc%C3%ADa,+J.A.&author=Masi%C3%A1,+M.&author=Guti%C3%A9rrez,+F.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=186%E2%80%93230&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.007&pmid=33309541)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.007)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33309541)\] 19. Alemany, A.; Baro, B.; Ouchi, D.; RodĂł, P.; Ubals, M.; Corbacho-MonnĂ©, M.; Vergara-Alert, J.; Rodon, J.; SegalĂ©s, J.; Esteban, C. Analytical and clinical performance of the panbio COVID-19 antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test. J. Infect. **2020**, 82, 186–230. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Analytical+and+clinical+performance+of+the+panbio+COVID-19+antigen-detecting+rapid+diagnostic+test&author=Alemany,+A.&author=Baro,+B.&author=Ouchi,+D.&author=Rod%C3%B3,+P.&author=Ubals,+M.&author=Corbacho-Monn%C3%A9,+M.&author=Vergara-Alert,+J.&author=Rodon,+J.&author=Segal%C3%A9s,+J.&author=Esteban,+C.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=186%E2%80%93230&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.033&pmid=33421447)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.033)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33421447)\] 20. Azzi, L.; Baj, A.; Alberio, T.; Lualdi, M.; Veronesi, G.; Carcano, G.; Ageno, W.; Gambarini, C.; Maffioli, L.; Di Saverio, S. Rapid Salivary Test suitable for a mass screening program to detect SARS-CoV-2: A diagnostic accuracy study. J. Infect. **2020**, 81, 75–78. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rapid+Salivary+Test+suitable+for+a+mass+screening+program+to+detect+SARS-CoV-2:+A+diagnostic+accuracy+study&author=Azzi,+L.&author=Baj,+A.&author=Alberio,+T.&author=Lualdi,+M.&author=Veronesi,+G.&author=Carcano,+G.&author=Ageno,+W.&author=Gambarini,+C.&author=Maffioli,+L.&author=Di+Saverio,+S.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=81&pages=75%E2%80%9378&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.06.042&pmid=32579988)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.06.042)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32579988)\] 21. Cerutti, F.; Burdino, E.; Milia, M.G.; Allice, T.; Gregori, G.; Bruzzone, B.; Ghisetti, V. Urgent need of rapid tests for SARS CoV-2 antigen detection: Evaluation of the SD-Biosensor antigen test for SARS-CoV-2. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 132, 104654. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Urgent+need+of+rapid+tests+for+SARS+CoV-2+antigen+detection:+Evaluation+of+the+SD-Biosensor+antigen+test+for+SARS-CoV-2&author=Cerutti,+F.&author=Burdino,+E.&author=Milia,+M.G.&author=Allice,+T.&author=Gregori,+G.&author=Bruzzone,+B.&author=Ghisetti,+V.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=132&pages=104654&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104654&pmid=33053494)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104654)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33053494)\] 22. Chaimayo, C.; Kaewnaphan, B.; Tanlieng, N.; Athipanyasilp, N.; Sirijatuphat, R.; Chayakulkeeree, M.; Angkasekwinai, N.; Sutthent, R.; Puangpunngam, N.; Tharmviboonsri, T. Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay in comparison with real-time RT-PCR assay for laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 in Thailand. Virol. J. **2020**, 17, 177. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+assay+in+comparison+with+real-time+RT-PCR+assay+for+laboratory+diagnosis+of+COVID-19+in+Thailand&author=Chaimayo,+C.&author=Kaewnaphan,+B.&author=Tanlieng,+N.&author=Athipanyasilp,+N.&author=Sirijatuphat,+R.&author=Chayakulkeeree,+M.&author=Angkasekwinai,+N.&author=Sutthent,+R.&author=Puangpunngam,+N.&author=Tharmviboonsri,+T.&publication_year=2020&journal=Virol.+J.&volume=17&pages=177&doi=10.1186/s12985-020-01452-5)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-020-01452-5)\] 23. Diao, B.; Wen, K.; Zhang, J.; Chen, J.; Han, C.; Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Deng, G.; Zhou, H.; Wu, Y. Accuracy of a nucleocapsid protein antigen rapid test in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2020**, 27, 289.e1–289.e4. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Accuracy+of+a+nucleocapsid+protein+antigen+rapid+test+in+the+diagnosis+of+SARS-CoV-2+infection&author=Diao,+B.&author=Wen,+K.&author=Zhang,+J.&author=Chen,+J.&author=Han,+C.&author=Chen,+Y.&author=Wang,+S.&author=Deng,+G.&author=Zhou,+H.&author=Wu,+Y.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=289.e1%E2%80%93289.e4&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.057&pmid=33031947)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.057)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33031947)\] 24. Fenollar, F.; Bouam, A.; Ballouche, M.; Fuster, L.; Prudent, E.; Colson, P.; Tissot-Dupont, H.; Million, M.; Drancourt, M.; Raoult, D. Evaluation of the Panbio Covid-19 rapid antigen detection test device for the screening of patients with COVID-19. J. Clin. Microbiol. **2020**, 59, e02589-20. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+the+Panbio+Covid-19+rapid+antigen+detection+test+device+for+the+screening+of+patients+with+COVID-19&author=Fenollar,+F.&author=Bouam,+A.&author=Ballouche,+M.&author=Fuster,+L.&author=Prudent,+E.&author=Colson,+P.&author=Tissot-Dupont,+H.&author=Million,+M.&author=Drancourt,+M.&author=Raoult,+D.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Microbiol.&volume=59&pages=e02589-20&doi=10.1128/JCM.02589-20)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02589-20)\] 25. Gremmels, H.; Winkel, B.M.; Schuurman, R.; Rosingh, A.; Rigter, N.A.; Rodriguez, O.; Ubijaan, J.; Wensing, A.M.; Bonten, M.J.; Hofstra, L.M. Real-life validation of the Panbioℱ COVID-19 antigen rapid test (Abbott) in community-dwelling subjects with symptoms of potential SARS-CoV-2 infection. EClinicalMedicine **2021**, 31, 100677. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Real-life+validation+of+the+Panbio%E2%84%A2+COVID-19+antigen+rapid+test+\(Abbott\)+in+community-dwelling+subjects+with+symptoms+of+potential+SARS-CoV-2+infection&author=Gremmels,+H.&author=Winkel,+B.M.&author=Schuurman,+R.&author=Rosingh,+A.&author=Rigter,+N.A.&author=Rodriguez,+O.&author=Ubijaan,+J.&author=Wensing,+A.M.&author=Bonten,+M.J.&author=Hofstra,+L.M.&publication_year=2021&journal=EClinicalMedicine&volume=31&pages=100677&doi=10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100677)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100677)\] 26. Gupta, A.; Khurana, S.; Das, R.; Srigyan, D.; Singh, A.; Mittal, A.; Singh, P.; Soneja, M.; Kumar, A.; Singh, A.K. Rapid chromatographic immunoassay-based evaluation of COVID-19: A cross-sectional, diagnostic test accuracy study & its implications for COVID-19 management in India. Indian J. Med. Res. **2020**, 153, 126–131. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Rapid+chromatographic+immunoassay-based+evaluation+of+COVID-19:+A+cross-sectional,+diagnostic+test+accuracy+study+%2526+its+implications+for+COVID-19+management+in+India&author=Gupta,+A.&author=Khurana,+S.&author=Das,+R.&author=Srigyan,+D.&author=Singh,+A.&author=Mittal,+A.&author=Singh,+P.&author=Soneja,+M.&author=Kumar,+A.&author=Singh,+A.K.&publication_year=2020&journal=Indian+J.+Med.+Res.&volume=153&pages=126%E2%80%93131&doi=10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_3305_4120)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_3305_4120)\] 27. KrĂŒttgen, A.; Cornelissen, C.G.; Dreher, M.; Hornef, M.W.; Imöhl, M.; Kleines, M. Comparison of the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid antigen test to the real star Sars-CoV-2 RT PCR kit. J. Virol. Methods **2021**, 288, 114024. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Comparison+of+the+SARS-CoV-2+Rapid+antigen+test+to+the+real+star+Sars-CoV-2+RT+PCR+kit&author=Kr%C3%BCttgen,+A.&author=Cornelissen,+C.G.&author=Dreher,+M.&author=Hornef,+M.W.&author=Im%C3%B6hl,+M.&author=Kleines,+M.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Virol.+Methods&volume=288&pages=114024&doi=10.1016/j.jviromet.2020.114024&pmid=33227341)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviromet.2020.114024)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33227341)\] 28. Linares, M.; PĂ©rez-Tanoira, R.; Carrero, A.; Romanyk, J.; PĂ©rez-GarcĂ­a, F.; GĂłmez-Herruz, P.; Arroyo, T.; Cuadros, J. Panbio antigen rapid test is reliable to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first 7 days after the onset of symptoms. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 133, 104659. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Panbio+antigen+rapid+test+is+reliable+to+diagnose+SARS-CoV-2+infection+in+the+first+7+days+after+the+onset+of+symptoms&author=Linares,+M.&author=P%C3%A9rez-Tanoira,+R.&author=Carrero,+A.&author=Romanyk,+J.&author=P%C3%A9rez-Garc%C3%ADa,+F.&author=G%C3%B3mez-Herruz,+P.&author=Arroyo,+T.&author=Cuadros,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=133&pages=104659&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104659)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104659)\] 29. Lindner, A.K.; Nikolai, O.; Kausch, F.; Wintel, M.; Hommes, F.; Gertler, M.; KrĂŒger, L.J.; Gaeddert, M.; Tobian, F.; Lainati, F. Head-to-head comparison of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detecting rapid test with self-collected anterior nasal swab versus professional-collected nasopharyngeal swab. Eur. Respir. J. **2020**, 57, 2003961. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Head-to-head+comparison+of+SARS-CoV-2+antigen-detecting+rapid+test+with+self-collected+anterior+nasal+swab+versus+professional-collected+nasopharyngeal+swab&author=Lindner,+A.K.&author=Nikolai,+O.&author=Kausch,+F.&author=Wintel,+M.&author=Hommes,+F.&author=Gertler,+M.&author=Kr%C3%BCger,+L.J.&author=Gaeddert,+M.&author=Tobian,+F.&author=Lainati,+F.&publication_year=2020&journal=Eur.+Respir.+J.&volume=57&pages=2003961&doi=10.1183/13993003.03961-2020&pmid=33303544)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.03961-2020)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33303544)\] 30. Liotti, F.M.; Menchinelli, G.; Lalle, E.; Palucci, I.; Marchetti, S.; Colavita, F.; La Sorda, M.; Sberna, G.; Bordi, L.; Sanguinetti, M. Performance of a novel diagnostic assay for rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection in nasopharynx samples. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2020**, 27, 487–488. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Performance+of+a+novel+diagnostic+assay+for+rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+in+nasopharynx+samples&author=Liotti,+F.M.&author=Menchinelli,+G.&author=Lalle,+E.&author=Palucci,+I.&author=Marchetti,+S.&author=Colavita,+F.&author=La+Sorda,+M.&author=Sberna,+G.&author=Bordi,+L.&author=Sanguinetti,+M.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=487%E2%80%93488&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.030&pmid=32979567)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.030)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32979567)\] 31. Mak, G.C.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Chow, N.L.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Analytical sensitivity and clinical sensitivity of the three rapid antigen detection kits for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 133, 104684. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Analytical+sensitivity+and+clinical+sensitivity+of+the+three+rapid+antigen+detection+kits+for+detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+virus&author=Mak,+G.C.&author=Lau,+S.S.&author=Wong,+K.K.&author=Chow,+N.L.&author=Lau,+C.&author=Lam,+E.T.&author=Chan,+R.C.&author=Tsang,+D.N.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=133&pages=104684&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104684)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104684)\] 32. Mak, G.C.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Chow, N.L.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Evaluation of rapid antigen detection kit from the WHO Emergency Use List for detecting SARS-CoV-2. J. Clin. Virol. **2021**, 134, 104712. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+rapid+antigen+detection+kit+from+the+WHO+Emergency+Use+List+for+detecting+SARS-CoV-2&author=Mak,+G.C.&author=Lau,+S.S.&author=Wong,+K.K.&author=Chow,+N.L.&author=Lau,+C.&author=Lam,+E.T.&author=Chan,+R.C.&author=Tsang,+D.N.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=134&pages=104712&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104712)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104712)\] 33. Mak, G.C.; Cheng, P.K.; Lau, S.S.; Wong, K.K.; Lau, C.; Lam, E.T.; Chan, R.C.; Tsang, D.N. Evaluation of rapid antigen test for detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 129, 104500. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+rapid+antigen+test+for+detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+virus&author=Mak,+G.C.&author=Cheng,+P.K.&author=Lau,+S.S.&author=Wong,+K.K.&author=Lau,+C.&author=Lam,+E.T.&author=Chan,+R.C.&author=Tsang,+D.N.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=129&pages=104500&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104500&pmid=32585619)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104500)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32585619)\] 34. Nalumansi, A.; Lutalo, T.; Kayiwa, J.; Watera, C.; Balinandi, S.; Kiconco, J.; Nakaseegu, J.; Olara, D.; Odwilo, E.; Serwanga, J. Field evaluation of the performance of a SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test in Uganda using nasopharyngeal samples. Int. J. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 104, 282–286. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Field+evaluation+of+the+performance+of+a+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+rapid+diagnostic+test+in+Uganda+using+nasopharyngeal+samples&author=Nalumansi,+A.&author=Lutalo,+T.&author=Kayiwa,+J.&author=Watera,+C.&author=Balinandi,+S.&author=Kiconco,+J.&author=Nakaseegu,+J.&author=Olara,+D.&author=Odwilo,+E.&author=Serwanga,+J.&publication_year=2021&journal=Int.+J.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=104&pages=282%E2%80%93286&doi=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.073&pmid=33130198)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.10.073)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33130198)\] 35. Pilarowski, G.; Lebel, P.; Sunshine, S.; Liu, J.; Crawford, E.; Marquez, C.; Rubio, L.; Chamie, G.; Martinez, J.; Peng, J. Performance characteristics of a rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay at a public plaza testing site in San Francisco. medRxiv **2020**. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Performance+characteristics+of+a+rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+assay+at+a+public+plaza+testing+site+in+San+Francisco&author=Pilarowski,+G.&author=Lebel,+P.&author=Sunshine,+S.&author=Liu,+J.&author=Crawford,+E.&author=Marquez,+C.&author=Rubio,+L.&author=Chamie,+G.&author=Martinez,+J.&author=Peng,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=medRxiv&doi=10.1101/2020.1111.1102.20223891)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1101/2020.1111.1102.20223891)\] 36. Pilarowski, G.; Marquez, C.; Rubio, L.; Peng, J.; Martinez, J.; Black, D.; Chamie, G.; Jones, D.; Jacobo, J.; Tulier-Laiwa, V. Field performance and public health response using the BinaxNOW TM Rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection assay during community-based testing. Clin. Infect. Dis. **2020**. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Field+performance+and+public+health+response+using+the+BinaxNOW+TM+Rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+assay+during+community-based+testing&author=Pilarowski,+G.&author=Marquez,+C.&author=Rubio,+L.&author=Peng,+J.&author=Martinez,+J.&author=Black,+D.&author=Chamie,+G.&author=Jones,+D.&author=Jacobo,+J.&author=Tulier-Laiwa,+V.&publication_year=2020&journal=Clin.+Infect.+Dis.&doi=10.1093/cid/ciaa1890&pmid=33367619)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1890)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33367619)\] 37. Porte, L.; Legarraga, P.; Vollrath, V.; Aguilera, X.; Munita, J.M.; Araos, R.; Pizarro, G.; Vial, P.; Iruretagoyena, M.; Dittrich, S. Evaluation of a novel antigen-based rapid detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples. Int. J. Infect. Dis. **2020**, 99, 328–333. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+novel+antigen-based+rapid+detection+test+for+the+diagnosis+of+SARS-CoV-2+in+respiratory+samples&author=Porte,+L.&author=Legarraga,+P.&author=Vollrath,+V.&author=Aguilera,+X.&author=Munita,+J.M.&author=Araos,+R.&author=Pizarro,+G.&author=Vial,+P.&author=Iruretagoyena,+M.&author=Dittrich,+S.&publication_year=2020&journal=Int.+J.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=99&pages=328%E2%80%93333&doi=10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.098&pmid=32497809)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.05.098)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32497809)\] 38. Scohy, A.; Anantharajah, A.; BodĂ©us, M.; Kabamba-Mukadi, B.; Verroken, A.; Rodriguez-Villalobos, H. Low performance of rapid antigen detection test as frontline testing for COVID-19 diagnosis. J. Clin. Virol. **2020**, 129, 104455. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Low+performance+of+rapid+antigen+detection+test+as+frontline+testing+for+COVID-19+diagnosis&author=Scohy,+A.&author=Anantharajah,+A.&author=Bod%C3%A9us,+M.&author=Kabamba-Mukadi,+B.&author=Verroken,+A.&author=Rodriguez-Villalobos,+H.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=129&pages=104455&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104455&pmid=32485618)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104455)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32485618)\] 39. Strömer, A.; Rose, R.; SchĂ€fer, M.; Schön, F.; Vollersen, A.; Lorentz, T.; Fickenscher, H.; Krumbholz, A. Performance of a Point-of-Care Test for the Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen. Microorganisms **2021**, 9, 58. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Performance+of+a+Point-of-Care+Test+for+the+Rapid+Detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+Antigen&author=Str%C3%B6mer,+A.&author=Rose,+R.&author=Sch%C3%A4fer,+M.&author=Sch%C3%B6n,+F.&author=Vollersen,+A.&author=Lorentz,+T.&author=Fickenscher,+H.&author=Krumbholz,+A.&publication_year=2021&journal=Microorganisms&volume=9&pages=58&doi=10.3390/microorganisms9010058&pmid=33379279)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9010058)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33379279)\] 40. Toptan, T.; Eckermann, L.; Pfeiffer, A.E.; Hoehl, S.; Ciesek, S.; Drosten, C.; Corman, V.M. Evaluation of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test: Potential to help reduce community spread? J. Clin. Virol. **2021**, 135, 104713. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+SARS-CoV-2+rapid+antigen+test:+Potential+to+help+reduce+community+spread?&author=Toptan,+T.&author=Eckermann,+L.&author=Pfeiffer,+A.E.&author=Hoehl,+S.&author=Ciesek,+S.&author=Drosten,+C.&author=Corman,+V.M.&publication_year=2021&journal=J.+Clin.+Virol.&volume=135&pages=104713&doi=10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104713)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104713)\] 41. Torres, I.; Poujois, S.; Albert, E.; Colomina, J.; Navarro, D. Evaluation of a rapid antigen test (Panbioℱ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device) for SARS-CoV-2 detection in asymptomatic close contacts of COVID-19 patients. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. **2021**, 27, 636.e1–636.e4. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluation+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+\(Panbio%E2%84%A2+COVID-19+Ag+rapid+test+device\)+for+SARS-CoV-2+detection+in+asymptomatic+close+contacts+of+COVID-19+patients&author=Torres,+I.&author=Poujois,+S.&author=Albert,+E.&author=Colomina,+J.&author=Navarro,+D.&publication_year=2021&journal=Clin.+Microbiol.+Infect.&volume=27&pages=636.e1%E2%80%93636.e4&doi=10.1016/j.cmi.2020.12.022)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.12.022)\] 42. Turcato, G.; Zaboli, A.; Pfeifer, N.; Ciccariello, L.; Sibilio, S.; Tezza, G.; Ausserhofer, D. Clinical application of a rapid antigen test for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients evaluated in the emergency department: A preliminary report. J. Infect. **2020**, 82, 14–16. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Clinical+application+of+a+rapid+antigen+test+for+the+detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+infection+in+symptomatic+and+asymptomatic+patients+evaluated+in+the+emergency+department:+A+preliminary+report&author=Turcato,+G.&author=Zaboli,+A.&author=Pfeifer,+N.&author=Ciccariello,+L.&author=Sibilio,+S.&author=Tezza,+G.&author=Ausserhofer,+D.&publication_year=2020&journal=J.+Infect.&volume=82&pages=14%E2%80%9316&doi=10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.012&pmid=33347944)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2020.12.012)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33347944)\] 43. Weitzel, T.; Legarraga, P.; Iruretagoyena, M.; Pizarro, G.; Vollrath, V.; Araos, R.; Munita, J.M.; Porte, L. Comparative evaluation of four rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection tests using universal transport medium. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 39, 101942. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Comparative+evaluation+of+four+rapid+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+detection+tests+using+universal+transport+medium&author=Weitzel,+T.&author=Legarraga,+P.&author=Iruretagoyena,+M.&author=Pizarro,+G.&author=Vollrath,+V.&author=Araos,+R.&author=Munita,+J.M.&author=Porte,+L.&publication_year=2021&journal=Travel+Med.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=39&pages=101942&doi=10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101942&pmid=33278609)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101942)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33278609)\] 44. Yamayoshi, S.; Sakai-Tagawa, Y.; Koga, M.; Akasaka, O.; Nakachi, I.; Koh, H.; Maeda, K.; Adachi, E.; Saito, M.; Nagai, H. Comparison of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19. Viruses **2020**, 12, 1420. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Comparison+of+Rapid+Antigen+Tests+for+COVID-19&author=Yamayoshi,+S.&author=Sakai-Tagawa,+Y.&author=Koga,+M.&author=Akasaka,+O.&author=Nakachi,+I.&author=Koh,+H.&author=Maeda,+K.&author=Adachi,+E.&author=Saito,+M.&author=Nagai,+H.&publication_year=2020&journal=Viruses&volume=12&pages=1420&doi=10.3390/v12121420&pmid=33322035)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/v12121420)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33322035)\] 45. Oishee, M.J.; Ali, T.; Jahan, N.; Khandker, S.S.; Haq, M.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Sil, B.K.; Lugova, H.; Krishnapillai, A.; Abubakar, A.R. COVID-19 pandemic: Review of contemporary and forthcoming detection tools. Infect. Drug Resist. **2021**, 14, 1049–1082. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=COVID-19+pandemic:+Review+of+contemporary+and+forthcoming+detection+tools&author=Oishee,+M.J.&author=Ali,+T.&author=Jahan,+N.&author=Khandker,+S.S.&author=Haq,+M.A.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Sil,+B.K.&author=Lugova,+H.&author=Krishnapillai,+A.&author=Abubakar,+A.R.&publication_year=2021&journal=Infect.+Drug+Resist.&volume=14&pages=1049%E2%80%931082&doi=10.2147/IDR.S289629&pmid=33762831)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S289629)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33762831)\] 46. Rao, S.N.; Manissero, D.; Steele, V.R.; Pareja, J. A narrative systematic review of the clinical utility of cycle threshold values in the context of COVID-19. Infect. Dis. Ther. **2020**, 9, 573–586. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=A+narrative+systematic+review+of+the+clinical+utility+of+cycle+threshold+values+in+the+context+of+COVID-19&author=Rao,+S.N.&author=Manissero,+D.&author=Steele,+V.R.&author=Pareja,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=Infect.+Dis.+Ther.&volume=9&pages=573%E2%80%93586&doi=10.1007/s40121-020-00324-3&pmid=32725536)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-020-00324-3)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32725536)\] 47. Surkova, E.; Nikolayevskyy, V.; Drobniewski, F. False-positive COVID-19 results: Hidden problems and costs. Lancet Respir. Med. **2020**, 8, 1167–1168. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=False-positive+COVID-19+results:+Hidden+problems+and+costs&author=Surkova,+E.&author=Nikolayevskyy,+V.&author=Drobniewski,+F.&publication_year=2020&journal=Lancet+Respir.+Med.&volume=8&pages=1167%E2%80%931168&doi=10.1016/S2213-2600\(20\)30453-7)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600\(20\)30453-7)\] 48. Kucirka, L.M.; Lauer, S.A.; Laeyendecker, O.; Boon, D.; Lessler, J. Variation in false-negative rate of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction–based SARS-CoV-2 tests by time since exposure. Ann. Intern. Med. **2020**, 173, 262–267. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Variation+in+false-negative+rate+of+reverse+transcriptase+polymerase+chain+reaction%E2%80%93based+SARS-CoV-2+tests+by+time+since+exposure&author=Kucirka,+L.M.&author=Lauer,+S.A.&author=Laeyendecker,+O.&author=Boon,+D.&author=Lessler,+J.&publication_year=2020&journal=Ann.+Intern.+Med.&volume=173&pages=262%E2%80%93267&doi=10.7326/M20-1495&pmid=32422057)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1495)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32422057)\] 49. Ai, T.; Yang, Z.; Hou, H.; Zhan, C.; Chen, C.; Lv, W.; Tao, Q.; Sun, Z.; Xia, L. Correlation of chest CT and RT-PCR testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A report of 1014 cases. Radiology **2020**, 296, 32–40. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Correlation+of+chest+CT+and+RT-PCR+testing+for+coronavirus+disease+2019+\(COVID-19\)+in+China:+A+report+of+1014+cases&author=Ai,+T.&author=Yang,+Z.&author=Hou,+H.&author=Zhan,+C.&author=Chen,+C.&author=Lv,+W.&author=Tao,+Q.&author=Sun,+Z.&author=Xia,+L.&publication_year=2020&journal=Radiology&volume=296&pages=32%E2%80%9340&doi=10.1148/radiol.2020200642&pmid=32101510)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200642)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32101510)\] \[[Green Version](https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148/radiol.2020200642)\] 50. Sil, B.K.; Jahan, N.; Haq, M.A.; Oishee, M.J.; Ali, T.; Khandker, S.S.; Kobatake, E.; Mie, M.; Khondoker, M.U.; Jamiruddin, M.R. Development and performance evaluation of a rapid in-house ELISA for retrospective serosurveillance of SARS-CoV-2. PLoS ONE **2021**, 16, e0246346. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Development+and+performance+evaluation+of+a+rapid+in-house+ELISA+for+retrospective+serosurveillance+of+SARS-CoV-2&author=Sil,+B.K.&author=Jahan,+N.&author=Haq,+M.A.&author=Oishee,+M.J.&author=Ali,+T.&author=Khandker,+S.S.&author=Kobatake,+E.&author=Mie,+M.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Jamiruddin,+M.R.&publication_year=2021&journal=PLoS+ONE&volume=16&pages=e0246346&doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0246346&pmid=33529223)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246346)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33529223)\] 51. Paek, S.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Cho, J.-H.; Kim, Y.-S. Development of rapid one-step immunochromatographic assay. Methods **2000**, 22, 53–60. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Development+of+rapid+one-step+immunochromatographic+assay&author=Paek,+S.-H.&author=Lee,+S.-H.&author=Cho,+J.-H.&author=Kim,+Y.-S.&publication_year=2000&journal=Methods&volume=22&pages=53%E2%80%9360&doi=10.1006/meth.2000.1036)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2000.1036)\] \[[Green Version](http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9a56/726c272c4620cfb4647332ebdb71e84b6997.pdf)\] 52. Odell, I.D.; Cook, D. Immunofluorescence techniques. J. Investig. Dermatol. **2013**, 133, e4. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Immunofluorescence+techniques&author=Odell,+I.D.&author=Cook,+D.&publication_year=2013&journal=J.+Investig.+Dermatol.&volume=133&pages=e4&doi=10.1038/jid.2012.455)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2012.455)\] \[[Green Version](http://www.jidonline.org/article/S0022202X15359546/pdf)\] 53. Sil, B.K.; Jamiruddin, M.R.; Haq, M.A.; Khondoker, M.U.; Jahan, N.; Khandker, S.S.; Ali, T.; Oishee, M.J.; Kaitsuka, T.; Mie, M. AuNP Coupled Rapid Flow-Through Dot-Blot Immuno-Assay for Enhanced Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Specific Nucleocapsid and Receptor Binding Domain IgG. Int. J. Nanomed. **2021**, 16, 4739–4753. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=AuNP+Coupled+Rapid+Flow-Through+Dot-Blot+Immuno-Assay+for+Enhanced+Detection+of+SARS-CoV-2+Specific+Nucleocapsid+and+Receptor+Binding+Domain+IgG&author=Sil,+B.K.&author=Jamiruddin,+M.R.&author=Haq,+M.A.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Jahan,+N.&author=Khandker,+S.S.&author=Ali,+T.&author=Oishee,+M.J.&author=Kaitsuka,+T.&author=Mie,+M.&publication_year=2021&journal=Int.+J.+Nanomed.&volume=16&pages=4739%E2%80%934753&doi=10.2147/IJN.S313140)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S313140)\] 54. Lanser, L.; Bellmann-Weiler, R.; Öttl, K.-W.; Huber, L.; Griesmacher, A.; Theurl, I.; Weiss, G. Evaluating the clinical utility and sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing in relation to RT-PCR Ct values. Infection **2020**, 49, 555–557. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Evaluating+the+clinical+utility+and+sensitivity+of+SARS-CoV-2+antigen+testing+in+relation+to+RT-PCR+Ct+values&author=Lanser,+L.&author=Bellmann-Weiler,+R.&author=%C3%96ttl,+K.-W.&author=Huber,+L.&author=Griesmacher,+A.&author=Theurl,+I.&author=Weiss,+G.&publication_year=2020&journal=Infection&volume=49&pages=555%E2%80%93557&doi=10.1007/s15010-020-01542-0&pmid=33185807)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-020-01542-0)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33185807)\] 55. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interim Guidance on Ending Isolation and Precautions for Adults with COVID-19. 2021. Available online: <https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html> (accessed on 28 April 2021). 56. Jamal, A.J.; Mozafarihashjin, M.; Coomes, E.; Powis, J.; Li, A.X.; Paterson, A.; Anceva-Sami, S.; Barati, S.; Crowl, G.; Faheem, A. Sensitivity of nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Clin. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 72, 1064–1066. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Sensitivity+of+nasopharyngeal+swabs+and+saliva+for+the+detection+of+severe+acute+respiratory+syndrome+coronavirus+2&author=Jamal,+A.J.&author=Mozafarihashjin,+M.&author=Coomes,+E.&author=Powis,+J.&author=Li,+A.X.&author=Paterson,+A.&author=Anceva-Sami,+S.&author=Barati,+S.&author=Crowl,+G.&author=Faheem,+A.&publication_year=2021&journal=Clin.+Infect.+Dis.&volume=72&pages=1064%E2%80%931066&doi=10.1093/cid/ciaa848)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa848)\] 57. Zhao, L.; Li, L.; Liu, G.-q.; Chen, L.; Liu, X.; Zhu, J.; Li, B. Effect of freeze–thaw cycles on the molecular weight and size distribution of gluten. Food Res. Int. **2013**, 53, 409–416. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Effect+of+freeze%E2%80%93thaw+cycles+on+the+molecular+weight+and+size+distribution+of+gluten&author=Zhao,+L.&author=Li,+L.&author=Liu,+G.-q.&author=Chen,+L.&author=Liu,+X.&author=Zhu,+J.&author=Li,+B.&publication_year=2013&journal=Food+Res.+Int.&volume=53&pages=409%E2%80%93416&doi=10.1016/j.foodres.2013.04.013)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2013.04.013)\] \[[Green Version](https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/16/3493)\] 58. Adnan, N.; Khondoker, M.U.; Rahman, M.S.; Ahmed, M.F.; Sharmin, S.; Sharif, N.; Azmuda, N.; Akter, S.; Nahar, S.; Mou, T.J. Coding-complete genome sequences and mutation profiles of nine SARS-CoV-2 strains detected from COVID-19 patients in Bangladesh. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. **2021**, 10, e00124-21. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Coding-complete+genome+sequences+and+mutation+profiles+of+nine+SARS-CoV-2+strains+detected+from+COVID-19+patients+in+Bangladesh&author=Adnan,+N.&author=Khondoker,+M.U.&author=Rahman,+M.S.&author=Ahmed,+M.F.&author=Sharmin,+S.&author=Sharif,+N.&author=Azmuda,+N.&author=Akter,+S.&author=Nahar,+S.&author=Mou,+T.J.&publication_year=2021&journal=Microbiol.+Resour.+Announc.&volume=10&pages=e00124-21&doi=10.1128/MRA.00124-21&pmid=33707329)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.1128/MRA.00124-21)\] \[[PubMed](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33707329)\] 59. Singh, J.; Samal, J.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, J.; Agrawal, U.; Ehtesham, N.Z.; Sundar, D.; Rahman, S.A.; Hira, S.; Hasnain, S.E. Structure-function analyses of new SARS-CoV-2 variants B. 1.1. 7, B. 1.351 and B. 1.1. 28.1: Clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic and public health implications. Viruses **2021**, 13, 439. \[[Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Structure-function+analyses+of+new+SARS-CoV-2+variants+B.+1.1.+7,+B.+1.351+and+B.+1.1.+28.1:+Clinical,+diagnostic,+therapeutic+and+public+health+implications&author=Singh,+J.&author=Samal,+J.&author=Kumar,+V.&author=Sharma,+J.&author=Agrawal,+U.&author=Ehtesham,+N.Z.&author=Sundar,+D.&author=Rahman,+S.A.&author=Hira,+S.&author=Hasnain,+S.E.&publication_year=2021&journal=Viruses&volume=13&pages=439&doi=10.3390/v13030439)\] \[[CrossRef](http://doi.org/10.3390/v13030439)\] 60. Hanson, K.E.; Altayar, O.; Caliendo, A.M.; Arias, C.A.; Englund, J.A.; Hayden, M.K.; Lee, M.J.; Loeb, M.; Patel, R.; El Alayli, A. The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Antigen Testing. Clin. Infect. Dis. **2021**, 23. Version 1.0.0. Available online: <https://www.idsociety.org/practice-guideline/covid-19-guideline-antigen-testing> (accessed on 25 July 2021). | | | |---|---| | | **Publisher’s Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. | © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/>). ## Article Metrics Citations 94 55 54 87 Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Shard31 (laksa)
Root Hash11974975279136771031
Unparsed URLcom,mdpi!www,/2077-0383/10/16/3493 s443