Abstract
Background A rapidly increasing number of serological surveys for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies have been reported worldwide. A synthesis of this large corpus of data is needed.
Purpose To evaluate the quality of serological studies and provide a global picture of seroprevalence across demographic and occupational groups, and to provide guidance for conducting better serosurveys.
Data sources PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, medRxiv, bioRxiv, SSRN and Wellcome were searched for English-language papers published from December 1, 2019 to August 28, 2020.
Study selection Serological studies that evaluated seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections in humans.
Data extraction Two investigators independently extracted data from included studies.
Data Synthesis Most of 178 serological studies, representing tests in >800,000 individuals, identified were of low quality. Close contacts and high-risk healthcare workers had higher seroprevalence of 22.9% (95% CI: 11.1-34.7%) and 14.9% (4.8-25.0%), compared to low-risk healthcare workers and general population of 5.5% (4.6-6.4%) and 6.3% (5.5-7.1%). Generally, young people (0-20 yrs) were less likely to be seropositive compared to the middle-aged (21-55 yrs) populations (RR, 0.8, 95% CI: 0.7-0.8). Seroprevalence correlated with clinical COVID-19 reports with 10 (range: 2 to 34) infections per confirmed COVID-19 case.
Limitations Some heterogeneity cannot be well explained quantitatively.
Conclusions The overall quality of seroprevalence studies examined was low. The relatively low seroprevalence among general populations suggest that in most settings, antibody-mediated herd immunity is far from being reached. Given that ratio of infections to confirmed cases is on the same order of magnitude across different locales, reported case numbers may help provide insights into the proportion of the population infected.
Primary Funding source National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (PROSPERO: CRD42020198253).
Competing Interest Statement
H.Y. has received investigator-initiated research funding from Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Yichang HEC Changjiang Pharmaceutical Company; M.A. has received research funding from Seqirus; D.T.L. and A.S.A. has received research funding from the US National Institutes of Health. None of those research funding is related to COVID-19. All other authors report no competing interests.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (grant no. 81525023), Program of Shanghai Academic/Technology Research Leader (grant no. 18XD1400300), National Science and Technology Major project of China (grant no. 2017ZX10103009-005, 2018ZX10201001-010), the US National Institutes of Health (R01 AI135115 to D.T.L. and A.S.A.)
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This review was preregistered with the protocol available in the PROSPERO database (ID: CRD42020198253).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript was available in appendix.
