Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36993683›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023

Comparison of Capillary Blood Self-Collection using the Tasso-SST Device with Venous Phlebotomy for anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Measurement.

Elise R King, Haley E Garrett, Haley Abernathy, Caitlin A Cassidy, Cameron R Cabell, Bonnie E Shook-Sa, Jonathan J Juliano, Ross M Boyce, Allison E Aiello, Emily J Ciccone

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measuring seroprevalence over time is a valuable epidemiological tool for improving our understanding of COVID-19 immunity. Due to the large number of collections required for population surveillance as well as concerns about potential infection risk to the collectors, self-collection approaches are being increasingly pursued. To advance this methodology, we collected paired venous and capillary blood samples by routine phlebotomy and Tasso-SST device respectively from 26 participants and measured total immunoglobulin (Ig) and IgG antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) on both specimens. Qualitatively, no discrepancies were noted in binary results between Tasso and venipuncture-derived plasma. Furthermore, in vaccinated participants, correlation between Tasso and venous total Ig and IgG specific antibody quantitative levels was high (Total Ig: ρ = 0.72, 95% CI (0.39- 0.90); IgG: ρ = 0.85, 95% CI (0.54, 0.96)). Our results support the use of Tasso at-home collection devices for antibody testing.

Identifiers

PMID36993683
PMCPMC10055457
OpenAlexW4327861480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.