Temporal trends of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence during the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in Kenya

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Observed SARS-CoV-2 infections and deaths are low in tropical Africa raising questions about the extent of transmission. We measured SARS-CoV-2 IgG by ELISA in 9,922 blood donors across Kenya and adjusted for sampling bias and test performance. By 1st September 2020, 577 COVID-19 deaths were observed nationwide and seroprevalence was 9.1% (95%CI 7.6-10.8%). Seroprevalence in Nairobi was 22.7% (18.0-27.7%). Although most people remained susceptible, SARS-CoV-2 had spread widely in Kenya with apparently low associated mortality.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.09.21251404: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: Blood donors gave individual written consent for the use of their samples for research.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Laboratory analyses: We tested samples for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies using a previously described a previously described ELISA for whole length spike antigen3 at the KEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme in Kilifi, Kenya. Assay sensitivity, estimated in sera from 174 PCR positive Kenyan adults and a panel of sera from the UK National Institute of Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC) was 92.7% (95% CI 87.9-96.1%); specificity, estimated in 910 serum samples from Kilifi drawn in 2018 was 99.0% (95% CI 98.1-99.5%)1.
    anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG
    suggested: None
    antigen3
    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 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.

    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.