| Property | Value |
|---|
|
?:abstract
|
-
Results of three rapid immunochromatographic tests (ICTs) were compared with those obtained with two automated immunoassays for evaluation of their usefulness. One hundred fifty-nine patients and 67 healthy volunteers were included. Different assays demonstrate 41–45% of diagnostic sensitivities and 91–98% of specificities, with substantial agreement (89.3–91.2%), but a high percentage of weak positive results (13–22%) was observed with ICTs. ICTs performances were comparable to those of automated immunoassays. ICTs could have a role as screening approach due to their easy usability. Subjective interpretation, significant rate of uncertain results, uncertainty on viral antigens source are undoubtedly drawbacks.
|
|
?:creator
|
|
|
?:doi
|
-
10.1007/s10096-020-04040-1
|
|
?:doi
|
|
|
?:journal
|
-
Eur_J_Clin_Microbiol_Infect_Dis
|
|
?:license
|
|
|
?:pdf_json_files
|
-
document_parses/pdf_json/53773ae9338764659ce15c3a611d68cff79f782a.json
|
|
?:pmc_json_files
|
-
document_parses/pmc_json/PMC7572234.xml.json
|
|
?:pmcid
|
|
|
?:pmid
|
|
|
?:pmid
|
|
|
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease
|
|
|
?:sha_id
|
|
|
?:source
|
|
|
?:title
|
-
Evaluation of three immunochromatographic tests in COVID-19 serologic diagnosis and their clinical usefulness
|
|
?:type
|
|
|
?:year
|
|
![[This page as RDF]](https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}