Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1007/s10096-021-04224-3 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1007/s10096-021-04224-3 33839972!8036011!33839972     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 231.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Eur+J+Clin+Microbiol+Infect+Dis 2021 ; 40 (9): 1891-1898 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=33839972|t=2021. Accuracy of the serological detection of IgG and IgM to SARS-Cov-2: a prospective, cross-sectional study |pdf=|usr=}}{{33839972}} gab.com Text Accuracy of the serological detection of IgG and IgM to SARS-Cov-2: a prospective, cross-sectional study JO: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33839972 #FOAvip In response to the rapidly evolving of SARS-CoV-2 infection, numerous serological tests have been developed but their sensitivity and specificity are unclear. We collected serum samples of patients and health-care professionals to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescent (CLIA) and two lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFIA) to determine IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 virus. We calculated the phi correlation for qualitative results and test accuracy, adopting the following case definition: either real-time-PCR positivity or serological positivity with at least two different tests. We analyzed 259 samples, obtaining strong correlation between CLIA and both LFIA for IgG (phi=0.9), and moderate correlation for IgM (phi=0.6). For patients, the sensitivity was suboptimal for all methods (CLIA 81%, LFIA A 85%, LFIA B 78%), while it was poor in asymptomatic health-care workers (CLIA 50%, LFIA A 50%, LFIA B 33%). Overall, CLIA is more sensitive and specific for the determination of both IgG and IgM, whilst both LFIA methods reported good sensitivity and specificity for IgG, but scarce sensitivity for the IgM determination. The determination of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG is useful to detect infection 6 days from symptom onset. Twit Text FOAVip Accuracy of the serological detection of IgG and IgM to SARS-Cov-2: a prospective, cross-sectional study ????Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33839972 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=33839972 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|33839972}}</ref> Accuracy of the serological detection of IgG and IgM to SARS-Cov-2: a prospective, cross-sectional study #MMPMID33839972 Pecoraro V; Cassetti T; Meacci M; Gargiulo R; Capobianchi MR; Mussini C; Vecchi E; Pecorari M; Gagliotti C; Trenti T; Sarti M Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2021[Sep]; 40 (9): 1891-1898 PMID33839972show ga In response to the rapidly evolving of SARS-CoV-2 infection, numerous serological tests have been developed but their sensitivity and specificity are unclear. We collected serum samples of patients and health-care professionals to assess the accuracy of chemiluminescent (CLIA) and two lateral flow immunochromatographic assays (LFIA) to determine IgG and IgM antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 virus. We calculated the phi correlation for qualitative results and test accuracy, adopting the following case definition: either real-time-PCR positivity or serological positivity with at least two different tests. We analyzed 259 samples, obtaining strong correlation between CLIA and both LFIA for IgG (phi=0.9), and moderate correlation for IgM (phi=0.6). For patients, the sensitivity was suboptimal for all methods (CLIA 81%, LFIA A 85%, LFIA B 78%), while it was poor in asymptomatic health-care workers (CLIA 50%, LFIA A 50%, LFIA B 33%). Overall, CLIA is more sensitive and specific for the determination of both IgG and IgM, whilst both LFIA methods reported good sensitivity and specificity for IgG, but scarce sensitivity for the IgM determination. The determination of SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG is useful to detect infection 6 days from symptom onset. |Adult[MESH] |Aged[MESH] |Aged, 80 and over[MESH] |Antibodies, Viral/*blood[MESH] |COVID-19 Serological Testing/*methods/*standards[MESH] |COVID-19/*blood/virology[MESH] |Cross-Sectional Studies[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Immunoglobulin G/*blood[MESH] |Immunoglobulin M/*blood[MESH] |Male[MESH] |Middle Aged[MESH] |Prospective Studies[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2/*immunology[MESH] |Sensitivity and Specificity[MESH]Accuracy of the serological detection of IgG and IgM to SARS-Cov-2: a (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing