ArticleiScience2023
Serum HCoV-spike specific antibodies do not protect against subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adolescents.
Article in iScience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serological evaluation of coronavirus IgA and IgG antibodies in a repeated cross-sectional cohort of unvaccinated and vaccinated pregnant individuals over three months following SARS-CoV-2 infection.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Pre-existing and early cellular immune factors correlate with functionally complete protection against primary controlled human SARS-CoV-2 infection.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Longitudinal analysis of passively and actively acquired SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in infants with repeat newborn screening samples.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Minimal Impact of Prior Common Cold Coronavirus Exposure on Immune Responses to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Vaccination or Infection Risk in Older Adults in Congregate Care.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
41 authors at 17 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
SARS-CoV-2 infections in children are generally asymptomatic or mild and rarely progress to severe disease and hospitalization. Why this is so remains unclear. Here we explore the potential for protection due to pre-existing cross-reactive seasonal coronavirus antibodies and compare the rate of antibody decline for nucleocapsid and spike protein in serum and oral fluid against SARS-CoV-2 within the pediatric population. No differences in seasonal coronaviruses antibody concentrations were found at baseline between cases and controls, suggesting no protective effect from pre-existing immunity against seasonal coronaviruses. Antibodies against seasonal betacoronaviruses were boosted in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. In serum, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies fell below the threshold of positivity more quickly than anti-spike protein antibodies. These findings add to our understanding of protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2 within the pediatric population, which is important when considering pediatric SARS-CoV-2 immunization policies.
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.