ArticleBMC infectious diseases2021
Evaluation of serological lateral flow assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Development of Aptamer-Based Gold Nanoparticle Lateral Flow Test Strips for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 S Proteins on the Surface of Cold-Chain Food Packaging.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Polydopamine Nanoparticles-Based Three-Line Lateral Flow Immunoassay for COVID-19 Detection.Biosensors · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Access Bio CareStart rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen test in asymptomatic individuals tested at a community mass-testing program in Western Massachusetts.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Lateral Flow Immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Novel approach based on GQD-PHB as anchoring platform for the development of SARS-CoV-2 electrochemical immunosensor.Analytica chimica acta · 2022Article
- COVID-19 Amongst Travelers at Points of Entry in Nepal: Screening, Testing, Diagnosis and Isolation Practices.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Article
- Performance Evaluation of Lateral Flow Assays for Coronavirus Disease-19 Serology.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Alternative Methods to Detect Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Antibodies.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Article
- Correction to: Evaluation of serological lateral flow assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
58 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Lateral flow assays can detect anti-Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies to monitor transmission. However, standardized evaluation of their accuracy and tools to aid in interpreting results are needed.
methodsWe evaluated 20 IgG and IgM assays selected from available tests in April 2020. We evaluated the assays' performance using 56 pre-pandemic negative and 56 SARS-CoV-2-positive plasma samples, collected 10-40 days after symptom onset, confirmed by a molecular test and analyzed by an ultra-sensitive immunoassay. Finally, we developed a user-friendly web app to extrapolate the positive predictive values based on their accuracy and local prevalence.
resultsCombined IgG + IgM sensitivities ranged from 33.9 to 94.6%, while combined specificities ranged from 92.6 to 100%. The highest sensitivities were detected in Lumiquick for IgG (98.2%), BioHit for both IgM (96.4%), and combined IgG + IgM sensitivity (94.6%). Furthermore, 11 LFAs and 8 LFAs showed perfect specificity for IgG and IgM, respectively, with 15 LFAs showing perfect combined IgG + IgM specificity. Lumiquick had the lowest estimated limit-of-detection (LOD) (0.1 μg/mL), followed by a similar LOD of 1.5 μg/mL for CareHealth, Cellex, KHB, and Vivachek.
conclusionWe provide a public resource of the accuracy of select lateral flow assays with potential for home testing. The cost-effectiveness, scalable manufacturing process, and suitability for self-testing makes LFAs an attractive option for monitoring disease prevalence and assessing vaccine responsiveness. Our web tool provides an easy-to-use interface to demonstrate the impact of prevalence and test accuracy on the positive predictive values.
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.