2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2020.107360
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The difference between IgM and IgG antibody prevalence in different serological assays for COVID-19; lessons from the examination of healthcare workers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

6
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(14 reference statements)
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The age and sex distributions of the participants are shown in Fig 1C , and the sample characteristics and information on adverse vaccine events stratified by age are provided in Extended Data Table 1 . A portion of this cohort was described previously for the time period extending to 6 months after the first dose of mRNA vaccine 23, 24 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The age and sex distributions of the participants are shown in Fig 1C , and the sample characteristics and information on adverse vaccine events stratified by age are provided in Extended Data Table 1 . A portion of this cohort was described previously for the time period extending to 6 months after the first dose of mRNA vaccine 23, 24 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…a standard follow-up for subjects who test IgM positive which currently is to perform real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT–PCR) testing. It is vital to evaluate sensitivity of subclinical infections with sera from asymptomatic RT-PCR-positive individuals as positive control, and to assess specificity with sera collected before COVID-19 as negative control [ 97 ]. A study demonstrated that anti-SARS-CoV-2 S-RBD IgG CLIA has outstanding linearity for range of values within and above the cut-off points, rendering it especially useful for vaccinated individuals where antibody values are above the detection limit [ 98 ].…”
Section: Serological Tests Of Antibodiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Fukushima Prefecture, 5.1% of the total population completed the third dose as of February 3, 2022 [13]. In addition, certain disaster-affected populations in Fukushima have been continuously subjected to COVID-19 antibody titers monitoring to develop infection prevention measures accordingly [14,15]. This area has an advantage in that the residents are aware of the level of their own liquid immunity after vaccination and how it has evolved, allowing assessment on how this affects their third vaccination behavior.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%