Talk:COVID-19 rapid antigen test

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 rapid antigen test article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

COVID-19 Top‑importance

	COVID-19 portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject COVID-19 consensus

WikiProject COVID-19 aims to add to and build consensus for pages relating to COVID-19. They have so far discussed items listed below. Please discuss proposed improvements to them at the project talk page.

General

Superseded by TfD October 2020 and later practice - consult regular {{Current}} guidance.

Refrain from using Worldometer (worldometers.info) as a source due to common errors being observed as noted on the Case Count Task Force common errors page. (April 2020, April 2020)

For infoboxes on the main articles of countries, use Wuhan, Hubei, China for the origin parameter. (March 2020)

"Social distancing" is generally preferred over "physical distancing". (April 2020, May 2020)

Page title

COVID-19 (full caps) is preferable in the body of all articles, and in the title of all articles/category pages/etc.(RM April 2020, including the main article itself, RM March 2021).

SARS-CoV-2 (exact capitalisation and punctuation) is the common name of the virus and should be used for the main article's title, as well as in the body of all articles, and in the title of all other articles/category pages/etc. (June 2022, overturning April 2020)

Map

There is no consensus about which color schemes to use, but they should be consistent within articles as much as possible. There is agreement that there should be six levels of shading, plus gray for areas with no instances or no data. (May 2020)

There is no consensus about whether the legend, the date, and other elements should appear in the map image itself. (May 2020)

For map legends, ranges should use fixed round numbers (as opposed to updating dynamically). There is no consensus on what base population to use for per capita maps. (May 2020)

To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.

Attribution

We might add Template:Split article since this article was split from Rapid antigen test. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done -Mvolz (talk) 14:59, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How?

Shouldn't the article say something about how the test is administered (by sampling and analyzing what – mucus, blood, breath, ...)? --Lambiam 12:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed - and how does the test work? What molecules or parts of molecules does it detect? How is the detection transformed into a visible reading. What sources of inaccuracy are there, such as in the sampling, use of the kit itself or ambiguity in interpreting the visible result? How soon after exposure will the test produce a positive result? How does this relate to symptoms and viral shedding? How long after illness is the test likely to produce positive results? Does this vary with intensity and duration of illness? Does it detect Long-COVID? I don't recall seeing a Wikipedia article which has nothing about mechanisms. Robin Whittle (talk) 00:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with above. This article is written ineptly. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

?false positives

?false positives and negatives in the rapid Covid test 2600:1012:B116:5591:F810:1DE9:42BC:D67F (talk) 23:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do a test when you know for 100% sure you don't have covid. Then use exactly the same test (unused test of course) when you have symptomps and you suspect you have covid-19 sars2. This will eliminate at least some of the false positives in the future.

91.159.190.165 (talk) 05:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To eliminate false negatives, do the test first thing in the morning, before you rinse your nose and face, or whatever you use to treat your symptoms.

Test also all anatomical parts of your oral cavity, in case no virus in nose.

91.159.190.165 (talk) 05:22, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you still can't find any virus and you are sure you have covid, test also eyes and anal.

Maybe even other body orifices? Perhaps no point to test ears?

91.159.190.165 (talk) 05:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

false results?

false results? 2600:1012:B116:5591:F810:1DE9:42BC:D67F (talk) 23:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Significant change to the "Methods" section

The second paragraph of the Methods section tries to describe how an LFT works, but is very confusing. I'd like to rewrite it, but I'm concerned about making such a large change in one step. So, below is my rewrite of that paragraph:

A typical COVID-19 RAT is a lateral flow test (LFT).^[1]^{: Table S1}^[2] For an LFT, a liquid sample (such as from a nasal swab) is placed on a pad at one end of a porous paper-like strip.^[3]^[4] The liquid is pulled through the strip by wicking (capillary action), encountering different chemically-enhanced regions embedded within the strip.
First, at a "conjugate pad," soluble antibodies with gold nanoparticles are picked up by the liquid, attaching to any SARS-CoV-2 antigens present in the sample.^[2] Then, at the test line (which may be labelled "T"), antibodies specific to SARS-CoV-2 are anchored to the strip; these bind to any SARS-CoV-2 antigens, capturing the associated nanoparticles.^[2] Finally at the control line (which may be labelled "C"), antibodies that can attach to the antibodies with nanoparticles are anchored, capturing the remaining nanoparticles.^[2]
If there are no SARS-CoV-2 antigens present, then the gold nanoparticles are carried by the liquid, continue through the test line, and then captured at the control line, showing a single indicating a negative test. However, if there are antigens present, then some of the nanoparticles will be stopped at the test line and the rest will be stopped at the control line, showing two lines indicating a positive test.^[2]^[3]^[4]

I'd be grateful for any feedback; or, if you like, just edit the results into the page. -- Dan Griscom (talk) 03:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK; I've edited it in. -- Dan Griscom (talk) 22:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Cite error: The named reference Drain2022 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e Shirazi S, Stanford CM, Cooper LF (2021). "Testing for COVID-19 in dental offices: mechanism of action, application and interpretation of laboratory and point-of-care screening tests". The Journal of the American Dental Association. 152 (7): 514–525.e8. doi:10.1016/j.adaj.2021.04.019. ISSN 0002-8177. PMC 8096195. PMID 34176567.
^ ^a ^b "How COVID-19 lateral flow tests work". Welsh Government. 30 June 2022. Retrieved 6 July 2022.
^ ^a ^b Frew E, Roberts D, Barry S, Holden M, Restell Mand A, Mitsock E, et al. (2021). "A SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test for resource limited settings". Sci Rep. 11 (1): 23009. Bibcode:2021NatSR..1123009F. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-02128-y. PMC 8626481. PMID 34837001.

Expired tests, are the expiry dates arbitrary or based on research?

At least Boson and FlowFlex test manuals do not tell, is the accuracy still the same for example 6 months or 12 months after manufacture date. Should one use very recently manufactured test for more accurate results? Or is it OK to use any test that has enough Liquid left in the bottle, not evaporated so one can get the instructed 3 or 4 drops of liquid from bottle?

91.159.190.165 (talk) 05:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[Drain2022-1] Cite error: The named reference Drain2022 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[Shirazi2021-2] Shirazi S, Stanford CM, Cooper LF (2021). "Testing for COVID-19 in dental offices: mechanism of action, application and interpretation of laboratory and point-of-care screening tests". The Journal of the American Dental Association. 152 (7): 514–525.e8. doi:10.1016/j.adaj.2021.04.019. ISSN 0002-8177. PMC 8096195. PMID 34176567.

[WelshGovt2022-3] "How COVID-19 lateral flow tests work". Welsh Government. 30 June 2022. Retrieved 6 July 2022.

[Frew2021-4] Frew E, Roberts D, Barry S, Holden M, Restell Mand A, Mitsock E, et al. (2021). "A SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid diagnostic test for resource limited settings". Sci Rep. 11 (1): 23009. Bibcode:2021NatSR..1123009F. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-02128-y. PMC 8626481. PMID 34837001.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]