ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024
Diagnostic Utility of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antigenemia: A Meta-analysis.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 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.
- Assessment of Residual-Serum SARS-CoV-2-N-Antigen Testing for Hospital Surveillance in Germany.Journal of medical virology · 2026Article
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
Background: Studies of the diagnostic performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleocapsid antigen in blood (antigenemia) have reached variable conclusions. The potential utility of antigenemia measurements as a clinical diagnostic test needs clarification. Methods: We performed a systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Scopus through July 15, 2023, and requested source data from corresponding authors. Results: Summary sensitivity from 16 studies (4543 cases) sampled at ≤14 days of symptoms was 0.83 (0.75-0.89), and specificity was 0.98 (0.87-1.00) from 6 studies (792 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-negative controls). Summary sensitivity and specificity for paired respiratory specimens with cycle threshold values ≤33 were 0.91 (0.85-0.95) and 0.56 (0.39-0.73) from 10 studies (612 individuals). Source data from 1779 cases reveal that >70% have antigenemia 2 weeks following symptom onset, which persists in <10% at 28 days. The available studies suffer from heterogeneity, and Omicron-era data are scarce. Conclusions: Nucleocapsid antigenemia currently has limited utility due to limitations of existing studies and lack of Omicron-era data. Improved study designs targeting potential clinical uses in screening, surveillance, and complex clinical decision-making-especially in immunocompromised patients-are needed.
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.