ArticlePloS one2023
Monitoring SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence over time among pregnant women admitted to delivery units: Suitability for surveillance.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seroprevalence and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Trends: Findings from Surveillance Conducted at First Antenatal Care Visits in Kenya, Nigeria, Malawi, Mozambique, Uganda, and Zambia, 2021-2022.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025Article
- SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among Beninese pregnant women in the third year of the pandemic.BMC public health · 2024Article
- SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in pregnant women in Kilifi, Kenya from March 2020 to March 2022.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence over time and risk factors among pregnant women at delivery in São Paulo, Brazil; and to evaluate the suitability of pregnant women as a sentinel population for SARS-CoV-2 serosurveillance.
methodsUnselected consecutive pregnant women presenting at the labor ward of a single large hospital between July 20th 2020 to February 21st 2021 were enrolled and tested for SARS-CoV-2 serology using two assays: the rapid chromatic Wondfo One Step (for total IgA and IgG detection) and Roche Elecsys assay (detecting anti-nucleoprotein [N] IgG). SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was computed as smooth spline function over time with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Risk factors were evaluated for positivity by each assay. We compared timepoint seroprevalence by the two assays with four concomitant community household surveys (HHS), in which the Roche assay was used, to determine the sensitivity and relevance of the pregnant women population as sentinel population.
resultsOverall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 28.9% (221/763) by Roche and 17.9% (137/763) by Wondfo. Reported symptoms experienced during pregnancy were all significantly correlated with being SARS-CoV-2 seropositive at delivery with any assay (with odds-ratios ranging from 3.0 [95% CI: 2.1-4.3] for coryza to 22.8 [95% CI: 12.3-46.6] for ageusia). Seropositivity by either assay was high in women at delivery in the early period of the pandemic (June 2020), compared with seropositivity in women from the concomitant HHS: 44.1% (95% CI: 21.8-66.4) for Roche, 54.1% (30.9-78.5) for Wondfo, versus 11.4% (95% CI: 9.2-13.6) for HHS. For later periods (October 2020 and January 2021), the seropositivity in women at delivery measured by Roche corresponded well with the prevalence found among women in the HHS using the same assay, whilst prevalence measured by Wondfo dropped.
conclusionsWomen at delivery represent a highly exposed and readily accessible population for sentinel surveillance of emerging infections such as SARS-CoV-2.
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.