Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Oct:126:172-176.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.037. Epub 2020 Jul 3.

Testing COVID-19 tests faces methodological challenges

Affiliations
Review

Testing COVID-19 tests faces methodological challenges

Patrick M Bossuyt. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Oct.

Abstract

In battling the COVID-19 pandemic, testing is essential. The detection of viral RNA allows the identification of infected persons, whereas the detection of antibodies may reveal a response to a previous infection. Tests for coronavirus should be rigorously evaluated in terms of their analytical and clinical performance. This poses not only logistic challenges, but also methodological ones. Some of these are generic for the diagnostic accuracy paradigm, whereas others are more specific for tests for viruses. Problematic for evaluations of the clinical performance of tests for viral RNA is the absence of an independent reference standard. Many studies lack rigor in terms of the recruitment of study participants. Study reports are often insufficiently informative, which makes it difficult to assess the applicability of study findings. Attempts to summarize the performance of these tests in terms of a single estimate of the clinical sensitivity fail to do justice to the identifiable sources of the large heterogeneity in mechanisms for generating false negative results.

Keywords: Analytical performance; COVID-19; Clinical performance; Diagnostic accuracy; Medical tests; SARS-CoV-2.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Horvath A.R., Lord S.J., StJohn A., Sandberg S., Cobbaert C.M., Lorenz S. From biomarkers to medical tests: the changing landscape of test evaluation. Clinica Chim Acta Int J Clin Chem. 2014;427:49–57. - PubMed
    1. Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing directive 98/79/EC and commission decision 2010/227/EU. Official Journal of the European Union 2017;117:176-332. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/746/oj Available at.
    1. Cohen J.F., Korevaar D.A., Altman D.G., Bruns D.E., Gatsonis C.A., Hooft L. STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open. 2016;6(11):e012799. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bossuyt P.M., Reitsma J.B., Linnet K., Moons K.G. Beyond diagnostic accuracy: the clinical utility of diagnostic tests. Clin Chem. 2012;58:1636–1643. - PubMed
    1. Lu R., Zhao X., Li J., Niu P., Yang B., Wu H. Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding. Lancet. 2020;395:565–574. - PMC - PubMed