ArticleHeliyon2023
Evaluation of the Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG rapid test device performance.
Article in Heliyon, 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
23 authors at 15 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Panbio™ COVID-19 IgG Rapid Test Device ("Panbio™") detects IgG antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein from viral infection or vaccination. Objectives: To determine the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the Panbio™ professional use test, using fingerstick whole blood and venous plasma. Study design: Fingerstick whole blood and venous plasma from each participant were tested with Panbio™ and compared against the SARS-CoV-2 IgG II assay on the Abbott Architect™ platform (Europe) or the equivalent AdviseDx SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Abbott Alinity i™ platform (US). 447 evaluable participants were enrolled across 6 US and 9 European clinical centers. Results: For unvaccinated participants with PCR-confirmed infection ≥21 days post-symptom onset, the Panbio™ sensitivity with fingerstick whole blood was 92.6 % (95 % CI: 85.9, 96.7), and the specificity was 97.0 % (95 % CI: 93.1, 99.0). For venous plasma, the sensitivity was 90.0 % (95 % CI: 79.5, 96.2) for participants with PCR-confirmed infection and symptom onset 22-180 days ago; the specificity was 96.3 % (92.2, 98.6). For vaccinated participants, the sensitivity was 98.4 % (95 % CI: 91.2, 100.0) for fingerstick whole blood and 96.7 % (95 % CI: 88.7, 99.6) for venous plasma. Conclusion: The Panbio™ test had high sensitivity and specificity for detecting IgG against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.
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.