ArticleHeliyon2024
Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at the University hospital Heidelberg and correlation with SARS-CoV-2 incidence.
Article in Heliyon, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Since the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in late 2019, many studies suggest that actual infection rates may far exceed reported cases. Therefore, this study provides a comprehensive overview of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody measurements and their significance in epidemiological surveillance, especially regarding the true extent of SARS-CoV-2 infections, allowing more detailed insights into the dynamics of the pandemic. Methods: Antibodies were measured using the Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay for the nucleocapsid (N) protein and the SARS-CoV-2 IgG (sCOVG) assay for the spike (S) protein. A total of 25197 specimens from University Hospital Heidelberg were analyzed between May 2020 and December 2023, with 16957 samples measured for both antibodies, 2756 for anti-N only, and 5484 for anti-S only.For the epidemiological tracing of the SARS-CoV-2 incidence we analyzed changes in the anti-N positivity rate and anti-S positivity rate within our tertiary hospital setting across consecutive quarters. Results: Anti-N measurements allowed for a retrospective analysis of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiological developments, revealing significant changes (p <0.05) in the anti-N positivity rate following incidence peaks (increase) and low incidence periods (decrease) with only three non-significant transitions.On the other hand, the anti-S positivity rate showed only four significant transitions between consecutive quarters. Conclusion: The anti-N positivity rate is an effective and straightforward retrospective serological tool for tracking epidemiological trends, while the anti-S rate is influenced by vaccination and epidemiology as well, making it inept for the tracing of epidemiological changes. Although the recent development in SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology with increasing intervals between infection waves already provide an enhanced statistical robustness, we recommend the determination of the anti-N positivity rate in larger study populations.
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.