Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36376417›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Nationally representative results on SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and testing in Germany at the end of 2020.

Hannelore Neuhauser, Angelika Schaffrath Rosario, Hans Butschalowsky, Sebastian Haller, Jens Hoebel, Janine Michel, Andreas Nitsche, Christina Poethko-Müller, Franziska Prütz, Martin Schlaud and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Nationwide population-based infection- and vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in Germany in autumn/winter 2021/2022.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. COVID-19 as an Occupational Disease-Temporal Trends in the Number and Severity of Claims in Germany.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    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

19 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Hannelore Neuhauser *Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany. neuhauserh@rki.de.
Angelika Schaffrath Rosario *Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Hans ButschalowskyRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian HallerRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Jens HoebelRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Janine MichelRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Andreas NitscheRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Christina Poethko-MüllerRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Franziska PrützRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Martin SchlaudRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Hans W SteinhauerSocio-Economic Panel, German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin, Germany.
Hendrik WilkingRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Lothar H WielerRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Lars SchaadeRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Stefan LiebigSocio-Economic Panel, German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin, Germany.
Antje Gößwald *Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Markus M Grabka *Socio-Economic Panel, German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin, Germany.
Sabine Zinn *Socio-Economic Panel, German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin, Germany.
Thomas Ziese *Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Robert Koch Institute · DEGerman Institute for Economic Research · DEFreie Universität Berlin · DEHumboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 458531028Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft ZI 1535/1-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pre-vaccine SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence data from Germany are scarce outside hotspots, and socioeconomic disparities remained largely unexplored. The nationwide representative RKI-SOEP study (15,122 participants, 18-99 years, 54% women) investigated seroprevalence and testing in a supplementary wave of the Socio-Economic-Panel conducted predominantly in October-November 2020. Self-collected oral-nasal swabs were PCR-positive in 0.4% and Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2-S1-IgG ELISA from dry-capillary-blood antibody-positive in 1.3% (95% CI 0.9-1.7%, population-weighted, corrected for sensitivity = 0.811, specificity = 0.997). Seroprevalence was 1.7% (95% CI 1.2-2.3%) when additionally correcting for antibody decay. Overall infection prevalence including self-reports was 2.1%. We estimate 45% (95% CI 21-60%) undetected cases and lower detection in socioeconomically deprived districts. Prior SARS-CoV-2 testing was reported by 18% from the lower educational group vs. 25% and 26% from the medium and high educational group (p < 0.001, global test over three categories). Symptom-triggered test frequency was similar across educational groups. Routine testing was more common in low-educated adults, whereas travel-related testing and testing after contact with infected persons was more common in highly educated groups. This countrywide very low pre-vaccine seroprevalence in Germany at the end of 2020 can serve to evaluate the containment strategy. Our findings on social disparities indicate improvement potential in pandemic planning for people in socially disadvantaged circumstances.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdultAntibodies, ViralCOVID-19 TestingFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin GMaleSeroepidemiologic StudiesTravelTravel-Related IllnessAntibodies, ViralImmunoglobulin G

Identifiers

PMID36376417
PMCPMC9662125
OpenAlexW4308967312

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.