PMC:7784824 / 17464-17680 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"271","span":{"begin":56,"end":66},"obj":"Species"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A271","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"271","obj":"Tax:2697049"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"Similar to our findings, the performance of the Liaison SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (DiaSorin) was worst with a sensitivity of 81% (compared to 59% in our results) and specificity of 90% (compared with 100% in our results)."}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T188","span":{"begin":0,"end":216},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"Similar to our findings, the performance of the Liaison SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG (DiaSorin) was worst with a sensitivity of 81% (compared to 59% in our results) and specificity of 90% (compared with 100% in our results)."}