ArticleDiagnostic microbiology and infectious disease2022
Diagnostic performance of two serological assays for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies: surveillance after vaccination.
Article in Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Comparative Study of Nine SARS-CoV-2 IgG Lateral Flow Assays Using Both Post-Infection and Post-Vaccination Samples.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Massive vaccination programs are being carried out to limit the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that started in December 2019. Serological tests are of major importance as an indicator of circulation of the virus and to assess how vaccine-induced immunity progresses. An Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) and a Lateral Flow Assay (LFA) have been developed based on the SARS-CoV-2 recombinant Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) and the combination of Spike and Nucleoprotein, respectively. The validation with 1272 serum samples by comparison with INgezim COVID 19 DR showed good diagnostic performance (sensitivity: 93.2%-97.2%; specificity: 98.3%-99.3%) for detection of previous contact with SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, according to our results, these assays can help in the serosurveillance during and after vaccination, by detecting the humoral immune response as soon as 15 days postvaccination and identifying low-respondents. Hence, these tests could play a key role in the progression to a COVID-19 free world, helping to adjust future vaccination protocols.
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.