3.8 Review

Diagnostic Strategies of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection: Operational Recommendations for Health Professionals

期刊

出版社

SCIENCEDOMAIN INT
DOI: 10.9734/JPRI/2021/v33i38B32116

关键词

Diagnosis; SARS-CoV-2; molecular tests; serological tests; pneumonia

资金

  1. Scientific Research Deanship at University of Ha'il - Saudi Arabia [COVID-1941]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Given the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, accurate diagnosis and isolation of infected individuals are crucial for swiftly containing the disease. The increasing mutations in the virus RNA sequence pose a challenge for molecular diagnostics, requiring unconventional strategies for effective containment. The spread of SARS-CoV-2 differs from other Coronaviridae viruses, necessitating comprehensive and innovative diagnostic approaches.
Due to the massive impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic worldwide, the accurate and early diagnosis and isolation of infected individuals remains the main way of rapidly curtailing the extension of the disease. The increasing incidence of mutations in the virus RNA sequence represents the principal challenge for the use of molecular approaches for COVID-19 diagnosis. Additionally, because severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spreads differently to that of its Coronaviridae counterparts, unconventional strategies and diagnostic algorithms must be utilized and comprehensively expanded. Therefore, in this study, we sought to conduct a detailed in-depth investigation using many scientific interfaces to i) determine the fastest, most cost-effective, and most comprehensive diagnostic techniques, and ii) identify the proper specimens used for SARS-CoV-2 detection. To accomplish that, we reviewed previous studies investigated for the diagnosis of COVID-19. These strategies are organized to help health professionals and policymakers to quickly choose and apply the appropriate diagnostic approaches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据