PropertyValue
?:abstract
  • Here, we retrospectively analyzed the comparative results of 182 paired dry nasopharyngeal swabs tested by Abbott ID NOW and nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport medium by real-time RT-PCR methods. While the overall agreement was 96.2%, we found that of 15 samples that were tested positive with RT-PCR methods, 7 were missed by ID NOW, resulting in a false-negative rate of 47%.
?:creator
?:journal
  • Diagn_Microbiol_Infect_Dis
?:license
  • unk
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease
?:source
  • WHO
?:title
  • How many are we missing with ID NOW COVID-19 assay using direct nasopharyngeal swabs? Findings from a mid-sized academic hospital clinical microbiology laboratory
?:type
?:who_covidence_id
  • #625039
?:year
  • 2020

Metadata

Anon_0  
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/net/provenance/ns#DataItem>
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/rdfg-1/Graph>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/3uwaxfmm>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/topic> Anon_0
<http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/cp/owl/informationrealization.owl#realizes> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/data/entity/3uwaxfmm>
<http://purl.org/net/provenance/ns#createdBy>
Anon_1   (more)
expand all