Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32583852›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of clinical pathology2020

Review of Current Advances in Serologic Testing for COVID-19.

Andrea P Espejo, Yamac Akgun, Abdulaziz F Al Mana, Youley Tjendra, Nicolas C Millan, Carmen Gomez-Fernandez, Carolyn Cray

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of clinical pathology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

94 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 179 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Screening and confirmation tests for SARS-CoV-2: benefits and drawbacks.Beni-Suef University journal of basic and applied sciences · 2023
    Review
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrea P EspejoDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology and University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
Yamac AkgunDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
Abdulaziz F Al ManaDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
Youley TjendraDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
Nicolas C MillanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
Carmen Gomez-FernandezDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
Carolyn CrayDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Jackson Health System, Miami, FL.
University of Miami · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine and summarize the current literature on serologic methods for the detection of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

methodsA literature review was performed using searches in databases including PubMed, medRxiv, and bioRxiv. Thirty-two peer-reviewed papers and 23 preprints were examined.

resultsThe studies included lateral flow immunoassay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, chemiluminescence immunoassay, and neutralizing antibody assays. The use of all major SARS-CoV-2 antigens was demonstrated to have diagnostic value. Assays measuring total antibody reactivity had the highest sensitivity. In addition, all the methods provided opportunities to characterize the humoral immune response by isotype. The combined use of IgM and IgG detection resulted in a higher sensitivity than that observed when detecting either isotype alone. Although IgA was rarely studied, it was also demonstrated to be a sensitive marker of infection, and levels correlated with disease severity and neutralizing activity.

conclusionsThe use of serologic testing, in conjunction with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, was demonstrated to significantly increase the sensitivity of detection of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. There was conflicting evidence regarding whether antibody titers correlated with clinical severity. However, preliminary investigations indicated some immunoassays may be a surrogate for the prediction of neutralizing antibody titers and the selection of recovered patients for convalescent serum donation.

Indexed as

CoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsPandemicsPneumonia, ViralAntibody FormationBetacoronavirusClinical Laboratory TechniquesCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingHumansImmunoglobulin GSARS-CoV-2Immunoglobulin GChemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA)Convalescent serumCoronavirusCOVID-19Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)ImmunoassaysLateral flow immunoassay (LFIA)Plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT)SARS-CoV-2Serology

Identifiers

PMID32583852
PMCPMC7337672
OpenAlexW3037076666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.