Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies up to 25 April 2020 and public health implications

We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Caini, Saverio, Bellerba, Federica, Corso, Federica, Díaz-Basabe, Angélica, Natoli, Gioacchino, Paget, John, Facciotti, Federica, De Angelis, Simone Pietro, Raimondi, Sara, Palli, Domenico, Mazzarella, Luca, Pelicci, Pier Giuseppe, Vineis, Paolo, Gandini, Sara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) 2020
Materias:
Rapid Communication
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7403641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32553061
http://dx.doi.org/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.23.2000980
Descripción
Sumario:We reviewed the diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 serological tests. Random-effects models yielded a summary sensitivity of 82% for IgM, and 85% for IgG and total antibodies. For specificity, the pooled estimate were 98% for IgM and 99% for IgG and total antibodies. In populations with ≤ 5% of seroconverted individuals, unless the assays have perfect (i.e. 100%) specificity, the positive predictive value would be ≤ 88%. Serological tests should be used for prevalence surveys only in hard-hit areas.

Ejemplares similares