ArticleJournal of global health2021
Mapping of serological testing and SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies performed in 20 European countries, March-June 2020.
Article in Journal of global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence around the world: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of medical research · 2022Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic spread across Europe from February 2020. While robust SARS-CoV-2 serological assays were quickly developed, only limited information on applied serological testing is available. We describe the extent and nature of SARS-CoV-2 serological testing used in Europe and assess the links between epidemiology, mitigation strategies applied and seroprevalence.
methodsAn online questionnaire on SARS-CoV-2 serology was sent to the European Society of Clinical Virology and European Non-Polio Enterovirus Network members in September 2020. Data were analysed by comparing mitigation approaches, serological methods and seroprevalance studies performed.
resultsAbout 100 000 laboratory confirmed cases identified between March and June 2020 were reported by 36 participating laboratories from 20 countries. All responders experienced mitigation strategies including lockdowns and other closures. All except one participant had introduced serological testing; most had validated their assays (n = 29), but some had had difficulties in obtaining reference material. Most used commercial assays (n = 35), measuring IgG response against the spike antigen. Serology was used primarily for diagnostic purposes (n = 22) but also for convalescent plasma (n = 13) and research studies (n = 30). Seroprevalence studies targeted mainly health care workers (n = 20; seroprevalance 5% to 22%) and general population (n = 16; seroprevalance 0.88% to 5.6%). Basic demographic and clinical information were collected by most laboratories (n = 28), whereas data on long-term outcomes were rarely collected.
conclusionsThis is first study gathering systematic information on serological testing approaches implemented during the first pandemic wave in Europe.
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.