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 We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and 4 pre-print servers for English-language papers published from December 1, 2019 to September 25, 2020.
Study selection Serological studies evaluating SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in humans.
Data extraction Two investigators independently extracted data from studies.
Data Synthesis Most of 230 serological studies, representing tests in >1,400,000 individuals, identified were of low quality based on a standardized study quality scale. In the 51 studies of higher quality, high-risk healthcare workers had higher seroprevalence of 17.1% (95% CI: 9.9-24.4%), compared to low-risk healthcare workers and general population of 5.4% (0.7-10.1%) and 5.3% (4.2-6.4%). Seroprevalence varied hugely across WHO regions, with lowest seroprevalence of general population in Western Pacific region (1.7%, 0.0-5.0%). Generally, the young (<20 years) and the old (≥65 years) were less likely to be seropositive compared to middle-aged (20-64 years) populations.
Seroprevalence correlated with clinical COVID-19 reports, with pooled average of 7.7 (range: 2.0 to 23.1) serologically-detected-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 the relatively narrow range of estimates of the ratio of serologically-detected infections to confirmed cases across different locales, reported case counts may help provide insights into the true 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. 2018ZX10713001-007, 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
Footnotes
Disclaimer: The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the institutions with which the authors are affiliated.
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript was available in appendix.
