SynthesisJournal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology2022
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the accuracy of SARS-COV-2 IGM and IGG tests in individuals with COVID-19.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluation of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the prevention of COVID-19 (COPCOV): A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2024Trial
- Computational design of 3C-like protease substrate peptide for modular detection of protease activity of coronavirus.Engineering in life sciences · 2026Article
- Testing for SARS-CoV-2: lessons learned and current use cases.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Article
- Development and Evaluation of In-House ELISAs for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2-Specific Antibodies in COVID-19 Patients in Sri Lanka.International journal of microbiology · 2024Article
- Comprehensive, Comparative Evaluation of 35 Manual SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Comparison of the conventional tube and erythrocyte-magnetized technology in titration of red blood cell alloantibodies.World journal of biological chemistry · 2023Article
- Current immunoassays and detection of antibodies elicited by Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection.Journal of medical virology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionActive SARS-CoV-2 infection is confirmed mainly through the detection of viral nucleic acid via the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technique. Methods to assess humoral responses contribute to the monitoring of the disease and confirmation of exposure to the virus.
objectiveTo evaluate the accuracy of tests for IgM and IgG antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by RT-PCR and utility as complementary data for immunosurveillance.
methodsLiterature research was performed by searching the terms "COVID-19", "COVID-19 diagnostic testing" and "test" in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature to search for potentially eligible observational studies without language restrictions published up to September 2020.
resultsThe pooled sensitivity and specificity, regardless of collection moment, was 80.0% (CI 95% 72.0-86.0) and 97.0% (CI 95% 94.0-98.0) for "IgM and/or IgG", respectively. Serology considering immunoglobulins M and G together had a high accuracy performance on "fifteenth day and after": sensitivity and specificity was 91.0% (CI 95% 85.0-94.0) and 98.0% (CI 95% 95.0-99.0) respectively, DOR 461 and AUC 0.98.
conclusionThis study shows that serology is a group of tests with high accuracy, mainly following the second week after infection.
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.