Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33975005›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases2021

How to interpret and use COVID-19 serology and immunology tests.

David S Y Ong, Paraskevi C Fragkou, Valentijn A Schweitzer, Roy F Chemaly, Charalampos D Moschopoulos, Chrysanthi Skevaki, European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Respiratory Viruses (ESGREV)

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

86 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 144 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Predicting SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Pathogen Discovery in the Post-COVID Era.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

David S Y OngDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infection Control, Franciscus Gasthuis & Vlietland, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: davidsyong@gmail.com.
Paraskevi C FragkouFourth Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School of Athens, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Attikon University Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Valentijn A SchweitzerDepartment of Medical Microbiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Roy F ChemalyDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Infection Control, & Employee Health, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Charalampos D MoschopoulosFourth Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School of Athens, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Attikon University Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Chrysanthi SkevakiInstitute of Laboratory Medicine, Universities of Giessen and Marburg Lung Centre (UGMLC), Philipps University Marburg, German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany.
European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Respiratory Viruses (ESGREV)
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GRUtrecht University · NLThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversities of Giessen and Marburg Lung Center · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough molecular tests are considered the reference standard for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnostics, serological and immunological tests may be useful in specific settings.

objectivesThis review summarizes the underlying principles and performance of COVID-19 serological and immunological testing. SOURCES: Selected peer-reviewed publications on COVID-19 related serology and immunology published between December 2019 and March 2021. CONTENT: Serological tests are highly specific but heterogeneous in their sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19. For certain indications, including delayed disease presentations, serological tests can have added value. The presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 may indicate a recent or past COVID-19 infection. Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) antibody tests have the advantages of being easy and fast to perform, but many have a low sensitivity in acute settings. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs) have higher sensitivities. Besides humoral immunity, cellular immunity is also essential for successful host defences against viruses. Enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assays can be used to measure T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. The presence of cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells in never exposed patients suggests the possibility of cellular immunity induced by other circulating coronaviruses. T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 have also been detected in recovered COVID-19 patients with no detectable antibodies. IMPLICATIONS: Serological and immunological tests are primarily applied for population-based seroprevalence studies to evaluate the effectiveness of COVID-19 control measures and increase our understanding of the immunology behind COVID-19. Combining molecular diagnostics with serological tests may optimize the detection of COVID-19. As not all infected patients will develop antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, assessment of cellular immunity may provide complementary information on whether a patient has been previously infected with COVID-19. More studies are needed to understand the correlations of these serological and immunological parameters with protective immunity, taking into account the different circulating virus variants.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Serological TestingAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19HumansImmunity, CellularImmunity, HumoralImmunoassaySARS-CoV-2Sensitivity and SpecificityAntibodies, ViralAntibodiesCOVID-19ImmunitySARS-CoV-2SerologyT cell

Identifiers

PMID33975005
PMCPMC8106522
OpenAlexW3161094130

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.