SPEEDS: A portable serological testing platform for rapid electrochemical detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies

  1. Ran Peng
  2. Yueyue Pan
  3. Zhijie Li
  4. Zhen Qin
  5. James M. Rini
  6. Xinyu Liu

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113762
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.16.21256907: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The patient sample testing was approved by the research ethics boards at the University of Toronto (protocol number: 40357).
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    The CR3022 IgG and IgM antibodies were constructed by cloning the CR3022 Fab into a human IgG1 and human IgM framework, respectively (Ter Meulen et al., 2006).
    human IgG1
    suggested: None
    The biotinylated SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) protein is used as the capture probe that provides high specificity to SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibodies.
    SARS-CoV-2 IgG
    suggested: None
    Then, alkaline phosphatase (ALP)-labeled anti-human detection antibody, specifically against IgG or IgM antibodies, is added to bind to the captured IgG or IgM antibody.
    anti-human detection antibody, specifically against IgG
    suggested: None
    IgM
    suggested: None
    Then, 5 µL of ALP-labeled anti-human antibody (20 µg/mL, diluted in the ALP conjugate stabilizer) was added to the WE and incubated for 3 min, which was followed by another three times of PBS washing.
    anti-human
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    2.1 Materials and reagents: Streptavidin (N7021S) was purchased from New England Biolab (Whitby, ON, Canada).
    New England Biolab
    suggested: None
    All statistical analyses were conducted in OriginPro 2018 (OriginLab).
    OriginPro
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.05.16.21256907v1 on medRxiv