ReviewOpen forum infectious diseases2023
Performance of Blood-Based Nucleocapsid Antigen Tests for Diagnosis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection and Infectious Viral Shedding: A Systematic Review.
Review in Open forum infectious diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Assessment of Residual-Serum SARS-CoV-2-N-Antigen Testing for Hospital Surveillance in Germany.Journal of medical virology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Utility of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antigenemia: A Meta-analysis.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- The laboratory parameters-derived CoLab score as an indicator of the host response in ICU COVID-19 patients decreases over time: a prospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Data on the performance of blood-based nucleocapsid antigen tests for diagnosing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and infectious viral shedding are limited. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a systematic review to assess the performance of blood-based nucleocapsid (N) antigen tests in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection and identifying infectiousness. This review was registered on PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42022339635). We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Coronavirus Research Database for relevant studies published through 27 February 2023. Each study's risk of bias was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Our findings indicate that the performance of the N-antigen test is influenced by factors such as assay type, sampling timing, and illness severity. Sensitive assays provide suitable methods for viable screening and laboratory diagnostic tests in different clinical and research settings during the early phase of illness.
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.