Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33712679›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Point-of-care SARS-CoV-2 serological assays for enhanced case finding in a UK inpatient population.

S J C Pallett, S J Denny, A Patel, E Charani, N Mughal, J Stebbing, G W Davies, L S P Moore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

S J C PallettCentre of Defence Pathology, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2WB, UK.
S J DennyClinical Infection Department, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, UK.
A PatelClinical Infection Department, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, UK.
E CharaniNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK.
N MughalClinical Infection Department, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, UK.
J StebbingDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK.
G W DaviesClinical Infection Department, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, UK.
L S P MooreClinical Infection Department, Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, UK. l.moore@imperial.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a global pandemic. Case identification is currently made by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during the acute phase and largely restricted to healthcare laboratories. Serological assays are emerging but independent validation is urgently required to assess their utility. We evaluated five different point-of-care (POC) SARS-CoV-2 antibody test kits against PCR, finding concordance across the assays (n = 15). We subsequently tested 200 patients using the OrientGene COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test Cassette and find a sensitivity of 74% in the early infection period (day 5-9 post symptom onset), with 100% sensitivity not seen until day 13, demonstrating inferiority to PCR testing in the infectious period. Negative rate was 96%, but in validating the serological tests uncovered potential false-negatives from PCR testing late-presenting cases. A positive predictive value (PPV) of 37% in the general population precludes any use for general screening. Where a case definition is applied however, the PPV is substantially improved (95.4%), supporting use of serology testing in carefully targeted, high-risk populations. Larger studies in specific patient cohorts, including those with mild infection are urgently required to inform on the applicability of POC serological assays to help control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and improve case finding of patients that may experience late complications.

Indexed as

COVID-19 TestingInpatientsPoint-of-Care TestingSARS-CoV-2Serologic TestsAgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19FemaleHumansImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin MMaleMiddle AgedPublic Health SurveillanceAntibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin GImmunoglobulin M

Identifiers

PMID33712679
PMCPMC7955061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.