ReviewThe Lancet. Microbe2024
The importance of using WHO International Standards to harmonise SARS-CoV-2 serological assays.
Review in The Lancet. Microbe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of candidate reference materials for the harmonization of Lassa fever serology.Emerging microbes & infections · 2026Article
- Lack of harmonisation in immunological data: challenges in synthesising data during the COVID-19 pandemic.EBioMedicine · 2026Review
- Harmonization of IgG antibody values against the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cancer and COVID-19: A review of immune insights and partnerships to inform public health strategy.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2026Review
- In the time of COVID-19: challenges, successes, and lessons learned from studies in cancer patients.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- A Bioconjugate Vaccine Against Extra-Intestinal PathogenicVaccines · 2025Article
- Review
- Evaluation of three alternative methods to the plaque reduction neutralizing assay for measuring neutralizing antibodies to dengue virus serotype 2.Virology journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic led to the rapid development of tests to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection and ascertain the prevalence of infection, along with the formulation of various treatments and vaccines. Globally, over 220 anti-SARS-CoV-2 serological assays have been developed for laboratory use, and many of these assays are currently used to assess immune responses against SARS-CoV-2. However, because these assays were independently developed by different manufacturers with different target antigens, immunoglobulin detection, technologies, and data reporting approaches, the results are not directly comparable, making it challenging to draw conclusions regarding immune responses at the population level. With deficiencies in assay validation, standardisation, and harmonisation, the inability to use and compare large datasets is becoming a major issue as serological data continue to increase. To help in addressing this issue, WHO established the first International Standard for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin in late 2020. In this Personal View, we define the WHO International Standard for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin, summarise the uses of primary versus secondary serology standards, recommend the use of such standards for data harmonisation, and list guidance and resources for using serology standards to improve data comparability.
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.