Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33588354›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2021

Use of dried blood spot samples for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection using the Roche Elecsys ® high throughput immunoassay.

Ranya Mulchandani, Ben Brown, Tim Brooks, Amanda Semper, Nicholas Machin, Ezra Linley, Ray Borrow, David Wyllie, EDSAB-HOME Study Investigators

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Diagnostic performance of the SARS-CoV-2 S1RBD IgG ELISA (ImmunoDiagnostics) for the quantitative detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on dried blood spots.Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ranya MulchandaniField Service, Public Health England, United Kingdom; UK Field Epidemiology Training Programme, Public Health England, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ranya.mulchandani@phe.gov.uk.
Ben BrownPublic Health Laboratory Manchester, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
Tim BrooksPorton Down, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
Amanda SemperPorton Down, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
Nicholas MachinPublic Health Laboratory Manchester, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
Ezra LinleyPublic Health Laboratory Manchester, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
Ray BorrowPublic Health Laboratory Manchester, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
David WyllieField Service, Public Health England, United Kingdom.
EDSAB-HOME Study Investigators
Public Health England · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dried blood spot samples (DBS) provide an alternative sample type to venous blood samples for antibody testing. DBS are used by NHS for diagnosing Hepatitis C and by Public Health England for large scale HIV and Hepatitis C serosurveillance; the applicability of DBS based approaches for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection is uncertain. The study aimed to compare antibody detection in DBS eluates using the Roche Elecsys ® immunoassay with antibody detection in paired plasma samples, using the same assay. The study was in one Police and one Fire & Rescue facility in England; it comprised of 195 participants within a larger sample COVID-19 serodiagnostics study of keyworkers, EDSAB-HOME. Outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity of DBS (the index test) relative to plasma (the reference test), at an experimental cut-off; quality of DBS sample collected; estimates of relative sensitivity of DBS vs. plasma immunoassay in a larger population. 18/195 (9.2%) participants tested positive using plasma samples. DBS sample quality varied markedly by phlebotomist, and low sample volume significantly reduced immunoassay signals. Using an experimental cut-off, sensitivity and specificity of DBS were 89.0% (95% CI 67.2, 96.9%) and 100.0% (95% CI 97.9, 100%) respectively compared with using plasma. The limit of detection for DBS is about 30 times higher than for plasma. DBS use for SARS-CoV-2 serology, though feasible, is insensitive relative to immunoassays on plasma. Sample quality impacts on assay performance. Alternatives, including the collection of capillary blood samples, should be considered for screening programs.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19COVID-19 Serological TestingDried Blood Spot TestingEnglandEpidemiological MonitoringFemaleHumansImmunoassayLimit of DetectionMaleMiddle AgedSARS-CoV-2Young AdultAntibodies, ViralantibodyCOVID-19Dried Blood SpotsSARS-CoV-2serology

Identifiers

PMID33588354
PMCPMC7817498
OpenAlexW3122545442

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.