Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35028425›Full record

ArticleWellcome open research2021

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children - A resource for COVID-19 research: Antibody testing results, April - June 2021.

Daniel Major-Smith, Sarah Matthews, Thomas Breeze, Michael Crawford, Hannah Woodward, Nicholas Wells, Ruth Mitchell, Lynn Molloy, Kate Northstone, Nicholas John Timpson

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Wellcome open research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel Major-SmithPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6467-2023
Sarah MatthewsPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Thomas BreezePopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Michael CrawfordPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Hannah WoodwardPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Nicholas WellsPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Ruth MitchellMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3506-160X
Lynn MolloyPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Kate NorthstonePopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0602-1983
Nicholas John TimpsonPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7141-9189
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_20030Medical Research Council MC_PC_20059Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a prospective population-based cohort which recruited pregnant women in 1990-1992 and has followed these women, their partners (Generation 0; G0) and their offspring (Generation 1; G1) ever since. The study reacted rapidly and repeatedly to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, deploying multiple online questionnaires and a previous home-based antibody test in October 2020. A second antibody test, in collaboration with ten other longitudinal population studies, was completed by 4,622 ALSPAC participants between April and June 2021. Of 4,241 participants with a valid spike protein antibody test result (8.2% were void), indicating antibody response to either COVID-19 vaccination or natural infection, 3,172 were positive (74.8%). Generational differences were substantial, with 2,463/2,555 G0 participants classified positive (96.4%) compared to 709/1,686 G1 participants (42.1%). Of 4,199 participants with a valid nucleocapsid antibody test result (9.2% were void), suggesting potential and recent natural infection, 493 were positive (11.7%); 248/2,526 G0 participants (9.8%) and 245/1,673 G1 participants (14.6%) tested positive, respectively. We also compare results for this round of testing to that undertaken in October 2020. Future work will combine these test results with additional sources of data to identify participants' COVID-19 infection and vaccination status. These ALSPAC COVID-19 serology data are being complemented with linkage to health records and Public Health England pillar testing results as they become available, in addition to four previous questionnaire waves and a prior antibody test. Data have been released as an update to the previous COVID-19 datasets. These comprise: 1) a standard dataset containing

Indexed as

ALSPACantibody testingbirth cohort studyChildren of the 90scoronavirusCOVID-19vaccination

Identifiers

PMID35028425
PMCPMC8738971.2
OpenAlexW3205109327

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.