SynthesisClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2020
Diagnostic Characteristics of Serological-Based COVID-19 Testing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of the clinical performance of commercial SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid and antibody tests up to 22 August 2020.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical applications of detecting IgG, IgM or IgA antibody for the diagnosis of COVID-19: A meta-analysis and systematic review.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2021Pooled it
- A cross-sectional study of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers and residents of long-term facilities in Italy, January 2021.Journal of medical virology · 2022Article
- Immune response (IgG) following full inoculation with BNT162b2 COVID‑19 mRNA among healthcare professionals.International journal of molecular medicine · 2021Article
- IgM anti-SARS-CoV-2-specific determination: useful or confusing? Big Data analysis of a real-life scenario.Internal and emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Association between SARS-CoV-2 exposure and antibody status among healthcare workers in two London hospitals: a cross-sectional study.Infection prevention in practice · 2021Article
- [COVID-19 diagnostic tests: importance of the clinical context].Medicina clinica · 2021Review
- COVID-19 diagnostic tests: Importance of the clinical context.Medicina clinica (English ed.) · 2021Review
- Evaluation of serological lateral flow assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Systemic Inflammatory Index Is a Novel Predictor of Intubation Requirement and Mortality after SARS-CoV-2 Infection.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Rare and Fatal Gastrointestinal Mucormycosis (Zygomycosis) in a COVID-19 Patient: A Case Report.Clinical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection through rapid serology testing in the homeless population in the City of Rome, Italy. Preliminary results.Journal of public health research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Serologic testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) promises to assist in assessing exposure to and confirming the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to provide a roadmap for reopening countries worldwide. Considering this, a proper understanding of serologic-based diagnostic testing characteristics is critical. The aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of serological-based COVID-19 testing. Electronic searches were performed using Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Full-text observational studies that reported IgG or IgM diagnostic yield and used nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) of respiratory tract specimens, as a the reference standard in English language were included. A bivariate model was used to compute pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative likelihood ratio (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (OR), and summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies (n=1,166 individual tests) met inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for IgG was 81% [(95% CI, 61-92);I2=95.28], 97% [(95% CI, 78-100);I2=97.80], and 93% (95% CI, 91-95), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for IgM antibodies was 80% [(95% CI, 57-92);I2=94.63], 96% [(95% CI, 81-99);I2=92.96] and 95% (95% CI, 92-96). This meta-analysis demonstrates suboptimal sensitivity and specificity of serologic-based diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 and suggests that antibody testing alone, in its current form, is unlikely to be an adequate solution to the difficulties posed by COVID-19 and in guiding future policy decisions regarding social distancing and reopening of the economy worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.