Diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 on saliva samples relative to nasopharyngeal swabs in tropical hospital and extra-hospital contexts: The COVISAL study.

A prospective study was conducted among different intra and extra-hospital populations of French Guiana to evaluate the performance of saliva testing compared to nasopharyngeal swabs. Persons aged 3 years and older with mild symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 and asymptomatic persons with a testing indication were prospectively enrolled. Nasopharyngeal and salivary samples were stored at 4°C before analysis. Both samples were analyzed with the same Real-time PCR amplification of E gene, N gene, and RdRp gene. Between July 22th and October 28th, 1159 persons were included, of which 1028 were analyzed. When only considering as positives those with 2 target genes with Ct values <35, the sensitivity of RT-PCR on saliva samples was 100% relative to nasopharyngeal samples. Specificity positive and negative predictive values were above 90%. Across a variety of cultures and socioeconomic conditions, saliva tests were generally much preferred to nasopharyngeal tests and persons seemed largely confident that they could self-sample. For positive patients defined as those with the amplification of 2 specific target genes with Ct values below 35, the sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR on saliva samples was similar to nasopharyngeal samples despite the broad range of challenging circumstances in a tropical environment.

Prospective Comparison of Saliva and Nasopharyngeal Swab Sampling for Mass Screening for COVID-19.

Current testing for COVID-19 relies on reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction from a nasopharyngeal swab specimen. Saliva samples have advantages regarding ease and painlessness of collection, which does not require trained staff and may allow self-sampling. We enrolled 776 persons at various field-testing sites and collected nasopharyngeal and pooled saliva samples. One hundred sixty two had a positive COVID-19 RT-PCR, 61% were mildly symptomatic and 39% asymptomatic. The sensitivity of RT-PCR on saliva samples vs. nasopharygeal swabs varied depending on the patient groups considered or on Ct thresholds. There were 10 (6.2%) patients with a positive saliva sample and a negative nasopharyngeal swab, all of whom had Ct values <25 for three genes. For symptomatic patients for whom the interval between symptoms onset and sampling was <10 days sensitivity was 77% but when excluding persons with isolated N gene positivity (54/162), sensitivity was 90%. In asymptomatic patients, the sensitivity was only 24%. When we looked at patients with Cts <30, sensitivity was 83 or 88.9% when considering two genes. The relatively good performance for patients with low Cts suggests that Saliva testing could be a useful and acceptable tool to identify infectious persons in mass screening contexts, a strategically important task for contact tracing and isolation in the community.

Subjective Lexical Characteristics: Comparing Ratings of Members of the Target Population and Doctors for Words Stemming from a Medical Context.

The present study investigated the subjective lexical characteristics of words stemming from a medical context by comparing estimations of the target population (age range = 46-89) and of doctors. A total of 58 members of the target population and 22 oncologists completed measures of subjective frequency and emotional valence for words previously collected in interviews of announcement of cancer diagnosis. The members of the target population also completed tests of word definitions, without and within context. As expected, most of the words were rated less familiar, more negative and as generating more intense emotions to the target population than to the doctors. Moreover, only a few words were correctly defined by the target population. Adding a context helped the participants to define most of the words correctly. Importantly, we identified words that were rated familiar by the patients although they did not know their exact meaning. Overall, these results highlight the importance of taking into account the subjective lexical characteristics of words used in specific contexts.