Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Specific antibody test in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is still the main mode of serological diagnosis of cysticercosis. Of different techniques of antibody test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (micro-ELISA) has widely been applied. This study was undertaken to observe whether diagnostic capability can be improved by applying more sensitive techniques such as Protein A-ELISA and avidin biotin complex ELISA (ABC-ELISA). When evaluated using 115 sera of human cysticercosis, the antibody positive rates were not significantly improved in Protein A-ELISA (82.6%) and in ABC-ELISA (86.1%) than in micro-ELISA (81.7%). The specificities, evaluated in 165 sera from other diseases and normal controls, were significantly improved (88.5% by micro-ELISA, 93.3% by Protein A-ELISA and 93.8% by ABC-ELISA). Antibody levels (absorbance, abs.) in individual serum were correlated well (r = 0.83-0.86) each other. An actual benefit of Protein A-ELISA and ABC-ELISA was that they needed smaller amount of test sample.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3347/kjp.1993.31.1.49 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!