Tehran University of Medical Sciences Iranian Journal of Microbiology 2008-3289 17 5 2025 10 14 669 681 Sepide Kadivarian Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran Mosayeb Rostamian Infectious Diseases Research Center, Health Policy and Promotion Institute, Kermanshah, Iran Sara Kooti Air Pollution and Respiratory Diseases Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran Shirin Dashtbin Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran Somayeh Hosseinabadi Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran Ramin Abiri Fertility and Infertility Research Center, Research Institute for Health Technology, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran Amirhooshang Alvand Medical Technology Research Center, Research Institute for Health Technology, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran 2024 11 16 2025 07 12 Background and Objectives: Rapid and accurate identification of suspicious SARS-CoV-2 patients is essential in controlling the infection. Numerous commercial kits are developed which target diverse regions of the SARS-CoV-2 virus genome. This systematic review addresses the lack of comprehensive analyses comparing the diagnostic value of commercial kits for SARS-CoV-2 detection. We aimed to compare diagnostic value of commercial SARS-CoV-2 kits in clinical samples using a systematic review and meta-analysis method. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on main databases of Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science and Scopus from 2019 to October 2021 using the appropriate keywords. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guideline PRISMA checklist was used to select eligible studies. Results: The most frequent introduced kits were from USA (33 cases) and China (27). Among all studies, 11, 9 and 7 papers had assessed FDA –CDC, Sansure and Allplex kits, respectively. The majority of the kits were based on RT-PCR (52 cases) and the most frequent genes target was N protein (63 cases). The overall sensitivity of the kits was 80.5%. The lowest sensitivity was reported for Daan Kit, while the highest sensitivity was seen for many kits. The specificity of the kits ranged from 87.9% to 99.8% and the overall specificity was 97.9%. Both PPV and NPV of the kits ranged from 87.9% to 99.8% for PPV and 82.9% to 99.8% for NPV. Conclusion: Based on DOR obtained from three different formulas, GeneFinder, InBios, NxTAG, Simplexa and FDA-CDC kit have better detection performance. The GeneFinder Kit appears to be among the more suitable options regarding cost-effectiveness for each reaction. https://ijm.tums.ac.ir/index.php/ijm/article/view/5139 https://ijm.tums.ac.ir/index.php/ijm/article/download/5139/1812