ArticleCurrent microbiology2023
Sensitivities of a Rapid Test Versus an ELISA Kit for Detecting Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG in Sera from an Egyptian Cohort.
Article in Current microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to compare diagnostic sensitivities of a rapid test (Rt) and an ELISA kit for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG in virus-RT-PCR-positive (VPP) and virus-RT-PCR-unchecked (VPU) subjects in an Egyptian cohort during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The results revealed higher sensitivity of the Rt for detecting IgM/IgG in the VPP subjects. Both the Rt and ELISA showed identical sensitivities for IgM detection in the VPU subjects. The ELISA was more sensitive for detecting IgG in the VPU subjects. Generally, within both the VPP and the VPU groups, Rt was more sensitive for detecting IgM/IgG among the symptomatic (S) compared to asymptomatic (AS) subjects than ELISA. Within the VPP group, the Rt was more sensitive for detecting both IgM/IgG among the AS subjects than ELISA. In the VPU group, the Rt was more sensitive for detecting IgM among the S subjects than ELISA. The ELISA was more sensitive for detecting IgM/IgG among AS subjects than the Rt. From these results we concluded that, despite the limitation of sample size, this study indicates suitability of the used Rt for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG among S subjects and sheds light on possibility of relying on the used ELISA for IgG detection among AS human subjects.
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.