ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2022
Exploratory assessment of serological tests to determine antibody titer against SARS-CoV-2: Appropriateness and limits.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Lack of vitamin D predicts impaired long-term immune response to COVID-19 vaccination.Endocrine · 2023Article
- Immune biomarkers associated with COVID-19 disease severity in an urban, hospitalized population.Practical laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Utility of Roche Elecsys anti-SARS-CoV-2 S in ascertaining post-vaccine neutralizing antibodies.Journal of clinical virology plus · 2023Article
- Exploratory assessment of serological tests to determine antibody titer against SARS-CoV-2: Appropriateness and limits.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSerological tests can be used to detect antibodies in the serum of subject's after SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. Currently, variability in antibody titers and the availability of a multiplicity of serological tests have made it necessary to highlight their appropriateness and limitations in various diagnostic settings.
methodsThis study is part of Covidiagnostix, a multicenter project aimed at the assessment of the health technology used in SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Based on data gained from the analysis of over 5000 subjects, a selected number of serum samples, representative of different diagnostic settings, were analyzed first by qualitative immunoassays (IgA, M, and G MILLIPLEX
resultsThis study evaluated the antibody content and titer of the WHO Standard and serum of subjects with/without previous infection and before/after vaccination for SARS-CoV-2.
conclusionThe definition of antibodies in the WHO standard and the analysis of serum samples allowed for the identification of the appropriateness of serological tests in each diagnostic setting, increasing the effectiveness of the resulting laboratory data. Furthermore, we found that it would be optimal to produce new international standards against the S1 domain and RBD of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein for a more effective serological monitoring of vaccination.
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.