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.

Review question / Objective: The objective of this research work is to evaluate the generation capacity of experimental research carried out in Peru, which will help in making future decisions, both to establish future studies, to elucidate the lack of studies in certain areas, as well as to determine the country's roadmap in a current and future state of emergency. Condition being studied: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and has spread worldwide becoming a pandemic with catastrophic effects. SARS-CoV-2 severely affects humans because it is highly transmissible and rapidly mutating, and is reported to have a mortality rate between 0.8-19.6% with regional variation. Various health strategies have been applied around the world, such as non-pharmacological interventions (use of masks, social distancing, monitoring of infected persons, etc.) and vaccination to reduce the spread of the virus and contagion. However, since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, there have been approximately 755 million cases of COVID-19 and 6.8 million deaths by February 2023.

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.

In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis that aims to evaluate the reliability of coronavirus disease diagnostic tests in 2019 (COVID-19). This article seeks to describe the scientific discoveries made because of diagnostic tests conducted in recent years during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Between 2020 and 2021, searches for published papers on the COVID-19 diagnostic were made in the PubMed database. Ninety-nine scientific articles that satisfied the requirements were analyzed and included in the meta-analysis, and the specificity and sensitivity of the diagnostic accuracy were assessed. When compared to serological tests such as the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), and chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA), molecular tests such as reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) performed better in terms of sensitivity and specificity. Additionally, the area under the curve restricted to the false-positive rates (AUCFPR) of 0.984 obtained by the antiviral neutralization bioassay (ANB) diagnostic test revealed significant potential for the identification of COVID-19. It has been established that the various diagnostic tests have been effectively adapted for the detection of SARS-CoV-2; nevertheless, their performance still must be enhanced to contain potential COVID-19 outbreaks, which will also help contain potential infectious agent outbreaks in the future.

Review question / Objective: The present study aims to systematically review and summarize the available literature on the diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 diagnostic tests. To do this, a systematic review of the medical literature was carried out between 2020 and 2021. The results were analyzed through a meta-analysis based on the techniques developed and used in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Eligibility criteria: The studies were selected in three stages. In the first, non-English language articles, duplicate articles, reviews, and meta-analyses were excluded, only articles published between 2020 and 2021 conducted on humans were included. In the second stage, the titles and ab-stracts of the articles selected through the search strategy were examined. Finally, the highly relevant full studies were retrieved and separated from the articles with a title or abstract that did not provide sufficient data to be included.