↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review with meta‐analysis: SARS‐CoV‐2 stool testing and the potential for faecal‐oral transmission

Overview of attention for article published in Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, August 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
22 X users
reddit
2 Redditors

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
Article details
Title
Systematic review with meta‐analysis: SARS‐CoV‐2 stool testing and the potential for faecal‐oral transmission
Published in
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, August 2020
DOI 10.1111/apt.16036
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been many scientific reports regarding gastrointestinal manifestations. Several reports indicate the possibility of viral shedding via faeces and the possibility of faecal-oral transmission. To critically assess the clinical relevance of testing stool samples and anal swabs and provide an overview of the potential faecal-oral transmission of SARS-CoV-2. A systematic literature search with MeSH terms was performed, scrutinising the Embase database, Google scholar, MEDLINE database through PubMed and The Cochrane Library, including articles from December 2019 until July 7 2020. Data were subsequently analysed with descriptive statistics. Ninety-five studies were included in the qualitative analysis. 934/2149 (43%) patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in stool samples or anal swabs, with positive test results up to 70 days after symptom onset. A meta-analysis executed with studies of at least 10 patients revealed a pooled positive proportion of 51.8% (95% CI 43.8 - 59.7%). Positive faecal samples of 282/443 patients (64%) remained positive for SARS-CoV-2 for a mean of 12.5 days, up to 33 days maximum, after respiratory samples became negative for SARS-CoV-2. Viable SARS-CoV-2 was found in 6/17 (35%) patients in whom this was specifically investigated. Viral shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in stool samples occurs in a substantial portion of patients, making faecal-oral transmission plausible. Furthermore, detection in stool sample or anal swab can persist long after negative respiratory testing. Therefore, stool sample or anal swab testing should be (re)considered in relation to decisions for isolating or discharging a patient.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history

Loading chart data

Monthly Attention Score data from August 2022 to July 2025. Daily data from 25 July 2025.

An error occurred while generating this chart. Please try again later.

No score history available for this output yet. Please try again later.

Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 244 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 35 14%
Researcher 28 11%
Student > Master 27 11%
Other 15 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 6%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 87 36%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 6%
Environmental Science 11 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 5%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 97 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 97. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2023.
All research outputs
#551,053
of 34,307,719 outputs
Outputs from Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#109
of 7,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,457
of 453,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#4
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,307,719 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,273 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 453,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.