Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Mandy SchwarzeInstitute of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Universität Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Ji LuoInstitute of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Universität Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Alexandra BrakelInstitute of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Universität Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Andor KrizsanInstitute of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Universität Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Nicole LakowaKlinik für Infektions- und Tropenmedizin, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, 09113 Chemnitz, Germany.
Thomas GrünewaldKlinik für Infektions- und Tropenmedizin, Klinikum Chemnitz gGmbH, 09113 Chemnitz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2955-3085
Claudia LehmannLaboratory for Transplantation Immunology, Institute for Transfusion Medicine, University Hospital Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2791-764X
Johannes WolfDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Hospital St. Georg gGmbH, 04129 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9669-0899
Stephan BorteDepartment of Laboratory Medicine, Hospital St. Georg gGmbH, 04129 Leipzig, Germany.
Sanja Milkovska-StamenovaInstitute of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Universität Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Markus ScholzInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, Universität Leipzig, 04107 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4059-1779
Ralf HoffmannInstitute of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Universität Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9932-5646
Leipzig University · DEKlinikum Chemnitz · DEKlinikum St. Georg · DEUniversity Hospital Leipzig · DE
Funding
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) INST 268/387-1European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Free State of Saxony 100523073
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
This study investigated the IgG and IgA antibody response against recombinant S1 and receptor binding domains (RBD) of the spike (S-) protein and the membrane (M-) protein using a set of 115 serum samples collected from patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Germany before April 2021 using protein and peptide ELISA. As S1- and RBD-proteins expressed in
Indexed as
ELISAepitopeimmunoglobulin A (IgA)immunoglobulin G (IgG)peptide mappingSARS-CoV-2
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.
Evaluation of S- and M-Proteins Expressed in · full record | OpenQuestion