About: Diagnostic Indexes of a Rapid IgG/IgM Combined Antibody Test for SARS-CoV-2

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Diagnostic Indexes of a Rapid IgG/IgM Combined Antibody Test for SARS-CoV-2 Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : schema:ScholarlyArticle, within Data Space : wasabi.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	Academic Article research paper schema:ScholarlyArticle
isDefinedBy	Covid-on-the-Web dataset
title	Diagnostic Indexes of a Rapid IgG/IgM Combined Antibody Test for SARS-CoV-2
Creator	Bo, Diao Feifei, Ren Jinya, Ding Qianchuan, Huang Ying, Liu Yue, Wang Yue-Ping, Liu
source	MedRxiv
abstract	[Abstract]Objective Coronavirus disease 2019 has become pandemic in the world. The need for IgG/IgM combined antibody test is booming, but data on diagnostic indexes evaluation was inadequate. The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic indexes of a rapid IgG/IgM combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2. Methods A total of 179 patients were enrolled. Serum were collected for IgG-IgM combined antibody test and corresponding nasal and pharyngeal swab specimens were collected for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. According to SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results, patients under study were categorized as PCR positive group in 90 patients and PCR negative group in 89 patients. Results 1. Of the 90 PCR positive samples, 77 were tested positive by SARS-CoV-2 IgG-IgM test kit, yielding a sensitivity of 85.6%. Meanwhile, of the 89 PCR negative sample, 8 samples were detected positive, resulting in a specificity of 91%. Positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of this test kit was 95.1%, 82.7%, and 88.3%, respectively. Kappa efficiency between IgG/IgM test kit and RT-PCR were 0.75. 2. Accuracy in mild/common and severe/critical subgroup were 73.9% and 97.7%, respectively. Accuracy in clinical confirmed, suspected cases and other disease subgroups were 70%, 60%, and 100%, respectively. 3. Patients were further divided into 0-7, 8-15 and >= 16 groups according to the time from illness onset to sample collection. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy in these three groups were 18.8%, 77.8% and 40%; 100%, 50% and 87.5%; 100%, 64.3%, and 93.9, respectively. Conclusion The sensitivity and specificity of this ease-of-use IgG/IgM combined test kit were adequate, plus short turnaround time, no specific requirements for additional equipment or skilled technicians, all of these collectively contributed to its competence for mass testing. At the current stage, it cannot take the place of SARA-CoV-2 nucleic acid RT-PCR, but can be served as a complementary option for RT-PCR. The combination of RT-PCR and IgG-IgM combined test kit could provide further insight into SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis.
has issue date	2020-03-30(xsd:dateTime)
bibo:doi	10.1101/2020.03.26.20044883
has license	medrxiv
sha1sum (hex)	c0ffa99948917197e138fb6ff445b3c2003d3d90
schema:url	https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.26.20044883
resource representing a document's title	Diagnostic Indexes of a Rapid IgG/IgM Combined Antibody Test for SARS-CoV-2
resource representing a document's body	covid:c0ffa99948917197e138fb6ff445b3c2003d3d90#body_text
is schema:about of	named entity 'RT-PCR' named entity 'predictive' named entity 'samples' named entity 'PCR' named entity 'TESTED' named entity 'ACCORDING' named entity 'TO SAMPLE' named entity 'EVALUATION' named entity 'data' named entity 'test' named entity 'antibody' named entity 'IgM' named entity 'antibody' named entity 'Patients' named entity 'The' named entity 'test' named entity 'specimens' named entity 'positive' named entity 'antibody' named entity 'rapid' named entity 'predictive' named entity 'RT-PCR' named entity 'group' named entity 'antibody test' named entity 'IgG' named entity 'SARS-CoV-2' named entity 'tested positive' named entity 'IgM' named entity 'PCR' named entity 'PCR' named entity 'antibody test' named entity 'IgG' named entity 'nucleic acid' named entity 'lung' named entity 'pathogen' named entity 'nucleic acid' named entity 'turnaround time' named entity 'COVID' named entity 'infection' named entity 'SARS' named entity 'sensitivity, specificity' named entity 'Wuhan' named entity 'sample size' named entity 'medRxiv' named entity 'SARS-CoV-2' named entity 'PCR' named entity 'SARS-CoV-2' named entity 'CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0' named entity 'RT-PCR' named entity 'False-positive' named entity 'serum' named entity 'CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0' named entity 'SARS' named entity 'PCR' named entity 'COVID -19' named entity 'upper respiratory tract' named entity 'China' named entity 'Virus' named entity 'medRxiv' named entity 'antibodies' named entity 'RT-PCR' named entity 'medRxiv' named entity 'turnaround time' named entity 'statistical analysis' named entity 'COVID-19' named entity 'preprint' named entity 'autoimmune disease' named entity 'viral infections' named entity 'IgG/IgM' named entity 'infection' named entity 'PPV' named entity 'PCR' named entity 'preprint' named entity 'IgM' named entity 'Virus' named entity 'RT-PCR' named entity 'Prevention and Control' named entity 'virus' named entity 'diagnostic tests'

Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020

Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2025 OpenLink Software