Evaluation of the performance of SARS-CoV-2 serological tools and their positioning in COVID-19 diagnostic strategies
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
No abstract available
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.16.156166: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethical approval was granted by the local institutional review board (CE-2020-34).
Consent: All patients provided written informed consent.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Antibodies Sentences Resources Another 27 serum samples were used to study cross-reactivity, including 20 samples from patients infected with four other human coronaviruses two to three months before sampling (HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-NL63, and HCoV-OC43), two from patients previously infected with influenza A virus, one from a patient previously infected with human rhinovirus, two containing … SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.16.156166: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: Ethical approval was granted by the local institutional review board (CE-2020-34).
Consent: All patients provided written informed consent.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Antibodies Sentences Resources Another 27 serum samples were used to study cross-reactivity, including 20 samples from patients infected with four other human coronaviruses two to three months before sampling (HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-NL63, and HCoV-OC43), two from patients previously infected with influenza A virus, one from a patient previously infected with human rhinovirus, two containing rheumatoid factor, and two positive for antinuclear antibodies. antinuclearsuggested: NoneEnzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (IgA, IgM and IgG): The following ELISA diagnostic kits were used for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies according to the manufacturer’s instructions: (1) ELISA-1: ELISA anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA and IgG (Euroimmun, Lübeck, Germany) and (2) ELISA-2: EDI™ novel coronavirus COVID-19 IgM and IgG (Epitope Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA). IgA, IgMsuggested: Noneanti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA, IgMsuggested: NoneIgG antibodies according to the manufacturer’s instructions: (1) ELISA-1: ELISA anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA and IgG (Euroimmun, Lübeck, Germany) and (2) ELISA-2: EDI™ novel coronavirus COVID-19 IgM and IgG (Epitope Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA)suggested: Nonethe manufacturer’s instructions: (1) ELISA-1: ELISAsuggested: NoneIgA and IgG (Euroimmun, Lübeck, Germany)suggested: NoneSoftware and Algorithms Sentences Resources Analyses were conducted using GraphPad (San Diego, CA, USA) Prism 6 software. GraphPadsuggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)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 did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
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.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-