MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413113029 · doi:10.1128/spectrum.00749-25

Comparison of the analytical and clinical sensitivities of 34 rapid antigen tests with prevalent SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK

2025· article· en· W4413113029 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rachel L. Byrne, Rachel S. Owen, Ghaith Aljayyoussi, Caitlin Greenland-Bews, Konstantina Kontogianni, Anushri Somasundaran, Dominic Wooding, Christopher T. Williams, Margaretha de Vos, Richard Body, Emily R. Adams, Camille Escadafal, Thomas Edwards, Ana I. Cubas-Atienzar, Kate Buist, Karina Clerking, Lorna Finch, Helen R. Savage, Caitlin R. Thompson, A. Joy Allen, Julian Braybrook, Peter Buckle, Paul Dark, Kerrie Davis, Adam J. Gordon, Daniel Lasserson, Clare Lendrem, Andrew Lewington, Mary Logan, Massimo Micocci, Brian K. Nicholson, Rafael Perera, Graham Prestwich, David Price, Charles Reynard, John Simpson, Valerie Tate, Philip Turner, Mark H. Wilcox

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology Spectrum · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research Council CanadaNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakBetacoronavirusVirologyCoronavirus InfectionsCoronavirusBiologyMedicineOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) have become a central pillar for the management of coronavirus disease worldwide due to their speed and ease of use and are now being developed for use in other emerging outbreaks. Like other viruses, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is subject to rapid mutation as it spreads, and new variants of concern (VOCs) emerge frequently, posing a significant challenge for the detection of newer, highly mutated variants. It is, therefore, important that the performance of Ag-RDTs is regularly evaluated, particularly in outbreak scenarios where rapid diagnostics are key to limiting disease spread. Here, we present a comprehensive evaluation of the analytical and clinical sensitivities of 34 commercially available Ag-RDTs with five SARS-CoV-2 VOCs, all of which were highly prevalent in the UK at various times between 2019 and 2023. This study highlights the importance of regular evaluation of the Ag-RDT performance, with several Ag-RDTs demonstrating a reduced performance with some VOCs. We conclude that a regular performance evaluation through our proposed pipeline, combined with a broad consensus approval threshold across global organizations, is essential to maintaining the effectiveness of Ag-RDTs as a disease management tool during outbreaks.IMPORTANCEAntigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) came to global prominence during the coronavirus disease pandemic, where they offered a quick and simple at-home diagnostic, which could be used to manage disease spread. A major ongoing challenge for the broad use of Ag-RDTs is the speed at which new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge, each of which has the potential to reduce the performance of available Ag-RDTs. As Ag-RDTs are explored for use in other viral disease outbreaks, pipelines for the regular evaluation of test performance are essential for ensuring that Ag-RDTs can be employed effectively. Here, we have developed a robust pipeline for the large-scale evaluation of commercially available Ag-RDTs against several major SARS-CoV-2 variants, which can be adapted and applied to other emerging outbreaks to ensure that test performance is maintained as a virus evolves.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology SpectrumSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207