ABSTRACT
One of the countries most adversely affected by the COVID-19 outbreak was Peru. Worldwide scientific knowledge creation has significantly grown because of this pandemic. This systematic study aims to examine several facets of Peru's experimental scientific production concerning COVID-19. Between December 2019 and June 2022, searches were made in the PubMed database for experimental scientific articles created in Peruvian institutions. The systematic review resulted in nine studies that meet the requirements. Data were extracted and analyzed on the type of biomedical research, the study's applicability, the thematic area and specific thematic, journal impact factor and quartile, funding, grants, and institution of affiliation for the first and correspondence authors. The results revealed that Peru needs to promote policies to boost research funding and the number of researchers to produce information that will be useful for managing diseases in the future. Yet, despite the funding provided by national organizations like National Council for Science, Technology, and Technological Innovation (CONCYTEC), there were few publications and little international collaboration. The studies that have been published focus mostly on applied research in the areas of diagnostics, sanitary products, and treatment and transmission, and they have great visibility because they are indexed in Q1 journals. This thorough study revealed Peru's inadequate reaction to COVID-19 regarding experimental scientific research. Peruvian authorities should think about supporting the required policies to boost the number of researchers and financial aid to produce information that may be utilized to manage potential new diseases in the future.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
In this work, we report a systematic review and meta-analysis that seeks to analyze the accuracy of diagnostic tests for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The objective of this article is to detail the scientific findings based on diagnostic tests of the last years when the pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) occurred. Searches for published studies were carried out in the PubMed database between the years 2020 and 2021 for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Ninety-nine scientific articles that met the criteria were examined and accepted in the meta-analysis, and the diagnostic accuracy was evaluated through specificity and sensitivity. Molecular tests [Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)] showed better performance in terms of sensitivity and specificity when compared to serological tests [Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassays (CMIA), and Fluorescence immunoassay (FIA)], which showed higher specificity, mainly for the detection of IgG antibodies; however, they showed sensitivity <90%. In addition, the antiviral neutralization bioassay (ANB) diagnostic test demonstrated high potential for the diagnosis of COVID-19, since it obtained the highest area under the curve restricted to the false-positive rates (AUCFPR) of 0.984. It is settled that the different diagnostic tests have been efficiently adapted for the detection of SARS-CoV-2; however, their performance still needs to be optimized to control future outbreaks of COVID-19, which will also serve to help the control of future infectious agents.