ArticleGene reports2021
Comparative study of SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers between male and female COVID-19 patients living in Kurdistan region of Iraq.
Article in Gene reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Flow cytometric analysis of the SARS coronavirus 2 antibodies in human plasma.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Impact of Vaccination Time on Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Levels in Adults: A Quasi-experimental Study.Cureus · 2024Article
- Sensitivities of a Rapid Test Versus an ELISA Kit for Detecting Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG in Sera from an Egyptian Cohort.Current microbiology · 2023Article
- The Levels of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein IgG Antibodies Before and After the Third Dose of Vaccination Against COVID-19.Journal of inflammation research · 2023Article
- Assessment of the longitudinal humoral response in non-hospitalized SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals at decentralized sites: Outcomes and concordance.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, there is increasing evidence that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes men to experience more serious symptoms and have a higher mortality rate than women, but the association between sex and immune response stays unknown till now, and weather patient's prognosis associated with sex or not is another vague in COVID-19. In this study, the SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody titer test was performed for 727 patients who were a positive RT-PCR result for COVID-19 and we determined the difference in immune response in both genders. Patients were divided into two groups based on their genders, which were 383 males and 344 females. Plasma was collected from the patients after 17 days of diagnosis with COVID-19, and the concentrations of specific antibodies (IgG and IgM) was measured by multiparametric immunoassay system (VIDAS). Results demonstrated that there was no significant difference in both IgM and IgG production in male participants compared to women. Moreover, despite there was a weak significant positive association between age and IgM in male patients, while there was no significant correlation between IgG and age for the same gender. On the other hand, a slight positive correlation between IgM and IgG with age was observed in female participants. Finally, it concluded that there was no sex biases in patients with COVID-19 in Erbil, Iraq. So, these findings are crucial to treat and care male and female's patients infected with COVID-19 at hospitals.
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.