One drawback of isothermal methods is their propensity to amplify non-specifically giving false positive results [REF], therefore many techniques have been designed to include a sequence specific detection step [REF]. Recently, methods  have been extensively explored using Cas proteins guided to specific DNA sequences by a complementary guide RNA (gRNA) to create highly sensitive and specific diagnostic tools. Some members of the Cas family of proteins have been shown to cleave DNA or RNA non-specifically after they have bound to their target DNA e.g. Cas13a cleaves non-targeted RNA \cite{East_Seletsky_2016} and was developed into the Cas13-SHERLOCK system \cite{Gootenberg_2017},  Cas12-DETECTR \cite{Chen_2018} cleaves double-stranded (ds) or single-stranded (ss) DNA, Cas14-DETECTR  \cite{Harrington_2018} cleaves ssDNA. These methods are finding wide applications in molecular diagnosis including detection of human papillomavirus  \cite{Chen_2018}, ZIKA virus\cite{Kellner_2019} and also Sars-CoV-2 \cite{Broughton_2020,Ding_2020}The cleavage activity has been combined with technologies for signal amplification and measurement including fluorescent, potentiometric and  colorimetric outputs in tubes or in lateral flow formats to create high-throughput, plate-based and POC tests.
How many tests for each target?
How many tests by each sample type (extracted DNA from blood, extracted DNA from faeces, extracted DNA from culture, other)
% sensitivity plotted over time (from earliest paper to 2022), possibly colour-coded by target or sample type, add horizontal lines for minimal and ideal TPP requirement
% specificity plotted over time (from earliest paper to 2022), possibly colour-coded by target or sample type, add horizontal lines for minimal and ideal TPP requirement
LOD in cfu plotted over time (from earliest paper to 2022), possibly colour-coded by target or sample type, add horizontal lines for minimal and ideal TPP requirement if mentioned there (I think it may just say % sensitivity)
LOD in gene copies plotted over time (from earliest paper to 2022), possibly colour-coded by target or sample type, not sure this is mentioned in TPP
Number of tests within ranges of time to result e.g. 0-6 hours, 6-24 hours, 2-5 days, 5+ days (may need to move boundaries to capture difference between normal blood culture + accelerated culture with PCR)

Increasing numbers of isothermal NATs have been published in the last 10 years