ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparing population-level humoral and cellular immunity to SARS-Cov-2 in Bangalore, India.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
9 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two types of immunity, humoral and cellular, offer protection against COVID. Humoral protection, contributed by circulating neutralizing antibodies, can provide immediate protection but decays more quickly than cellular immunity and can lose effectiveness in the face of mutation and drift in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Therefore, population-level seroprevalence surveys used to estimate population-level immunity may underestimate the degree to which a population is protected against COVID. In early 2021, before India began its vaccination campaign, we tested for humoral and cellular immunity to SARS-Cov-2 in representative samples of slum and non-slum populations in Bangalore, India. We found that 29.7% of samples (unweighted) had IgG antibodies to the spike protein and 15.5% had neutralizing antibodies, but at up to 46% showed evidence of cellular immunity. We also find that prevalence of cellular immunity is significantly higher in slums than in non-slums. These findings suggest (1) that a significantly larger proportion of the population in Bangalore, India, had cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 than had humoral immunity, as measured by serological surveys, and (2) that low socio-economic status communities display higher frequency of cellular immunity, likely because of greater exposure to infection due to population density.
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.