Journal
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 19, Issue 19, Pages -Publisher
MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912493
Keywords
COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus; rapid antigen test; lateral flow test; public health surveillance; saliva; nasopharyngeal swab; nasal swab; pandemic
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This article analyzed the academic literature on COVID-19 RAT using bibliometric methods. The findings showed variations in research output among different countries, as well as recurring scenarios and keywords. These research results are consistent with exchanges among laboratorians, authors, institutions, and publishers worldwide.
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to disrupt health systems worldwide, conducting Rapid Antigen Testing (RAT) at specified intervals has become an essential part of many people's lives around the world. We identified and analyzed the academic literature on COVID-19 RAT. The Web of Science electronic database was queried on 6 July 2022 to find relevant publications. Publication and citation data were retrieved directly from the database. VOSviewer, a bibliometric software, was then used to relate these data to the semantic content from the titles, abstracts, and keywords. The analysis was based on data from 1000 publications. The most productive authors were from Japan and the United States, led by Dr. Koji Nakamura from Japan (n = 10, 1.0%). The most academically productive countries were in the North America, Europe and Asia, led by the United States of America (n = 266, 26.6%). Sensitivity (n = 32, 3.2%) and specificity (n = 23, 2.3%) were among the most frequently recurring author keywords. Regarding sampling methods, saliva (n = 54, 5.4%) was mentioned more frequently than nasal swab (n = 32, 3.2%) and nasopharyngeal swab (n = 22, 2.2%). Recurring scenarios that required RAT were identified: emergency department, healthcare worker, mass screening, airport, traveler, and workplace. Our bibliometric analysis revealed that COVID-19 RAT has been utilized in a range of studies. RAT results were cross-checked with RT-PCR tests for sensitivity and specificity. These results are consistent with comparable exchanges of methods, results or discussions among laboratorians, authors, institutions and publishers in the involved countries of the world.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available