SynthesisBMC public health2024
Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthy blood donors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2024. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe development of a potent immune response and antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 is important for herd immunity. The serological response may be due to a previous infection or vaccination. Healthy blood donors could represent and provide information on the immune status of the general population. Therefore, we estimated the global and regional prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthy blood donors.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest from December 2019 to January 2023. After critical appraisal and quality assessment, a qualitative synthesis of the identified relevant articles was performed. The random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used to assess publication bias. Sensitivity analysis was performed, and heterogeneity was quantified using I
resultsA total of 70 peer-reviewed articles were selected that together included 2,454,192 blood donors. The global estimated pooled prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthy blood donors was 10.3% (95% CI: 4.6 - 18.0%, n = 70). The highest seroprevalence was observed in Asia (17.7%), followed by Africa (16.1%). The seroprevalence in studies conducted before the introduction of the vaccine was 6.1%, whereas those of studies conducted after vaccines were available was 27.6%. High seroprevalence was observed in studies that measured antibodies against the S protein of the virus (15.2%), while lower (12.5%) in those that measured antibodies against the N protein. A high seroprevalence was observed in studies that only measured IgG antibodies (16.3%), and it was 5.9% in studies that measured total antibodies.
conclusionThe prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among healthy blood donors varies, potentially indicating geographical disparities in transmission and vaccination rates. To enhance community resilience, addressing these differences through inclusive health policies and adaptable public health measures is crucial.
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.