“
TL;DR
This paper is a narrative review that evaluates current COVID-19 diagnostic methods (rRT-qPCR, antigen/antibody tests, CT scans) and their significant limitations, including invasiveness, cost, delay, and variable accuracy.
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2 authors, 2 centres
This summary was generated by AI from a single paper. It has not been reviewed by a clinician and is not clinical advice. Verify against the source before acting on it.
This paper is a narrative review that evaluates current COVID-19 diagnostic methods (rRT-qPCR, antigen/antibody tests, CT scans) and their significant limitations, including invasiveness, cost, delay, and variable accuracy.
This paper is a narrative review that evaluates current COVID-19 diagnostic methods (rRT-qPCR, antigen/antibody tests, CT scans) and their significant limitations, including invasiveness, cost, delay, and variable accuracy. The authors summarize preclinical and early clinical evidence for the potential of e-noses and canine olfactory detection to identify presymptomatic or asymptomatic infections. The review argues that such rapid, low-cost, point-of-care tools could enable more frequent population screening to suppress viral transmission. The central implication is that e-nose technologies, combined with VOC biomarker research, hold promise for improving public health surveillance, though the paper does not present original experimental data.