ArticleJournal of inflammation research2020
Clinical Value of SARS-CoV2 IgM and IgG Antibodies in Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Suspected Cases.
Article in Journal of inflammation research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the clinical value of SARS-CoV2 IgM and IgG antibodies in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in suspected cases by likelihood ratio.
methodsBy reinterpreting data from a previous study, the positive likelihood ratio of IgM and IgG antibodies in COVID-19 pneumonia diagnosis was calculated, and the posterior probability of IgM and IgG antibodies and their tandem detection was calculated finally.
resultsThe positive likelihood ratios of single IgM and IgG antibodies were 18.50 and 12.65, respectively, and the posterior probabilities were 90.18% and 86.26%, respectively. However, the posterior probability of the two antibody-tandem test was 99.15%, which could give clinicians more quantitative confidence in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in suspected cases. According to the results of this study, combining the advantages and disadvantages of nucleic acid testing and antibody detection, a feasible clinical path was found for clinicians to diagnose COVID-19 pneumonia from suspected cases.
conclusionFor suspected cases, IgM- and IgG-antibody tests should first be done at the same time. If all antibody tests are positive, COVID-19 pneumonia could be confirmed. If not, nucleic acid detection (once or more) should be carried out, and in extreme cases high-throughput viral genome sequencing is required.
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.