4.3 Article

COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Tests: Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Literature

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912493

关键词

COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; coronavirus; rapid antigen test; lateral flow test; public health surveillance; saliva; nasopharyngeal swab; nasal swab; pandemic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

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

4.3
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