ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2020
Multicenter evaluation of two chemiluminescence and three lateral flow immunoassays for the diagnosis of COVID-19 and assessment of antibody dynamic responses to SARS-CoV-2 in Taiwan.
Article in Emerging microbes & infections, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Indirect Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy for Seven Different SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays: A Meta-Analysis and Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Diagnostic Test Accuracy.Influenza and other respiratory viruses · 2025Pooled it
- Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Performance Evaluation of Three Antibody Binding Assays, a Neutralizing Antibody Assay, and an Interferon-Gamma Release Assay for SARS-CoV-2 According to Vaccine Type in Vaccinated Group.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluating the value of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection and neutralizing responses with euvirus: A population of 10776 close contacts in the epidemic of Fujian.Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry · 2023Article
- Proof-of-concept for speedy development of rapid and simple at-home method for potential diagnosis of early COVID-19 mutant infections using nanogold and aptamer.Nanomedicine : nanotechnology, biology, and medicine · 2022Article
- Immunogenicity and safety of homologous and heterologous ChAdOx1-S and mRNA-1273 vaccinations in healthy adults in Taiwan.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2022Article
- Effect of monoclonal antibody therapy on the endogenous SARS-CoV-2 antibody response.Clinical immunology (Orlando, Fla.) · 2022Article
- Application and Validation of SARS-CoV-2 RBD Neutralizing ELISA Assay.Archives of Razi Institute · 2022Article
- Humoral and Cellular Responses to BNT162b2 as a Booster Following Two Doses of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 Determined Using Three SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Assays and an Interferon-Gamma Release Assay: A Prospective Longitudinal Study in Healthcare Workers.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Performance of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Serological Diagnostic Tests and Antibody Kinetics in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the sensitivity of antibody tests for the laboratory confirmation of COVID-19.Future virology · 2021Review
- Development and Efficacy of Lateral Flow Point-of-Care Testing Devices for Rapid and Mass COVID-19 Diagnosis by the Detections of SARS-CoV-2 Antigen and Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Applications of laboratory findings in the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of COVID-19.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2021Review
- Comparing Results of Five SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Assays Before and After the First Dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine among Health Care Workers.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- SARS-CoV-2 Infection among Medical Institution Faculty and Healthcare Workers in Tokyo, Japan.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2021Article
- Evaluation of 32 rapid tests for detection of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2.Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry · 2021Article
- Mental health crisis in healthcare providers in the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional facility-based survey.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Screening, Diagnostic and Prognostic Tests for COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This multicenter, retrospective study included 346 serum samples from 74 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 194 serum samples from non-COVID-19 patients to evaluate the performance of five anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody tests, i.e. two chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs): Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Test (Roche Test) and Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG (Abbott Test), and three lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs): Wondfo SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test (Wondfo Test), ASK COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test (ASK Test), and Dynamiker 2019-nCoV IgG/IgM Rapid Test (Dynamiker Test). We found high diagnostic sensitivities (%, 95% confidence interval [CI]) for the Roche Test (97.4%, 93.4-99.0%), Abbott Test (94.0%, 89.1-96.8%), Wondfo Test (91.4%, 85.8-94.9%), ASK Test (97.4%, 93.4-99.0%), and Dynamiker Test (90.1%, 84.3-94.0%) after >21 days of symptom onset. Meanwhile, the diagnostic specificity was 99.0% (95% CI, 96.3-99.7%) for the Roche Test, 97.9% (95% CI, 94.8-99.2%) for the Abbott Test, and 100.0% (95% CI, 98.1-100.0%) for the three LFIAs. Cross-reactivity was observed in sera containing anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) IgG/IgM antibodies and autoantibodies. No difference was observed in the time to seroconversion detection of the five serological tests. Specimens from patients with COVID-19 pneumonia demonstrated a shorter seroconversion time and higher chemiluminescent signal than those without pneumonia. Our data suggested that understanding the dynamic antibody response after COVID-19 infection and performance characteristics of different serological test are crucial for the appropriate interpretation of serological test result for the diagnosis and risk assessment of patient with COVID-19 infection.
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.