Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://ir.mu.ac.ke:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/4654
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Chemtai, Alex K. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Bowry, T. R. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ahmad, Z. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T08:07:52Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-06-17T08:07:52Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 1981 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://ir.mu.ac.ke:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/4654 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Double diffusion (DD), indirect haemagglutination (IHA), immunoelectrophoresis (IEP), latex agglutination (LA), and complement fixation (CF) tests were evaluated for sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of 141 surgically-proven Turkana echinococcosis patients and 10 controls. The overall sensitivities for the tests were: IHA, 86.7%; LA, 53.3%; CF, 63.3%; DD, 55.0%; IEP, 55.0%. LA and CF tests produced a high number of false positive results; IHA gave a false positive result in 10% of cases; no false positives were obtained with IEP and DD. A combination of the latter three tests would therefore offer the best chance of detecting specific anti-Echinococcus antibodies, with an average sensitivity of 62.7%. The possible reasons for the relatively high incidence of false negative values are discussed. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | World Health Organisation | en_US |
dc.subject | Echinococcosis patients | en_US |
dc.subject | Immunodiagnostic technique | en_US |
dc.title | Evaluation of five immunodiagnostic techniques in echinococcosis patients | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | School of Medicine |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Alex etal.pdf | 624.03 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.