First antibody surveys draw fire for quality, bias

Some study authors use serology data to call for easing lockdowns, but critics push back. Surveying large swaths of the public for antibodies to the new coronavirus promises to show how widespread undiagnosed infections are, how deadly the virus really is, and whether enough of the population has be...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 2020-04, Vol.368 (6489), p.350-351
Main Author: Vogel, Gretchen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
Clinical Laboratory Techniques
Coronavirus Infections - diagnosis
Coronavirus Infections - immunology
Coronavirus Infections - transmission
COVID-19
COVID-19 Testing
Humans
Monitoring, Immunologic
Pandemics
Pneumonia, Viral - diagnosis
Pneumonia, Viral - immunology
Pneumonia, Viral - transmission
Quarantine
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Some study authors use serology data to call for easing lockdowns, but critics push back. Surveying large swaths of the public for antibodies to the new coronavirus promises to show how widespread undiagnosed infections are, how deadly the virus really is, and whether enough of the population has become immune for social distancing measures to be eased. But the first batch of results has generated more controversy than clarity. The numbers imply that confirmed COVID-19 cases are an even smaller fraction of the true number of people infected than many have estimated and that the vast majority of infections are mild. But many scientists question the accuracy of the antibody tests and complain that several of the research groups announced their findings in the press rather than in preprints or published papers, where their data could be scrutinized.
ISSN:0036-8075
1095-9203
DOI:10.1126/science.368.6489.350