↓ Skip to main content

COVID-19 in-vitro Diagnostics: State-of-the-Art and Challenges for Rapid, Scalable, and High-Accuracy Screening

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
39 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
COVID-19 in-vitro Diagnostics: State-of-the-Art and Challenges for Rapid, Scalable, and High-Accuracy Screening
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2021
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2020.605702
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zeina Habli, Sahera Saleh, Hassan Zaraket, Massoud L. Khraiche

Abstract

The world continues to grapple with the devastating effects of the current COVID-19 pandemic. The highly contagious nature of this respiratory disease challenges advanced viral diagnostic technologies for rapid, scalable, affordable, and high accuracy testing. Molecular assays have been the gold standard for direct detection of the presence of the viral RNA in suspected individuals, while immunoassays have been used in the surveillance of individuals by detecting antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Unlike molecular testing, immunoassays are indirect testing of the viral infection. More than 140 diagnostic assays have been developed as of this date and have received the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) emergency use authorization (EUA). Given the differences in assasy format and/or design as well as the lack of rigorous verification studies, the performance and accuracy of these testing modalities remain unclear. In this review, we aim to carefully examine commercialized and FDA approved molecular-based and serology-based diagnostic assays, analyze their performance characteristics and shed the light on their utility and limitations in dealing with the COVID-19 global public health crisis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 32 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Materials Science 2 3%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 33 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 17 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,621,367
of 26,018,952 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#166
of 8,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,640
of 539,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#7
of 348 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,018,952 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,676 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. 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 539,822 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 348 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 97% of its contemporaries.