ReviewClinical microbiology reviews1991
Serodiagnosis of parasitic diseases.
Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 1991. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of chimeric multivalent proteins for serological diagnosis of African animal trypanosomosis.Parasitology · 2025Article
- Profiling of Humoral Immune Response in Typhoid Patients against Differentially Extracted Whole Cell Bacterial Protein Derived fromInterdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Parasitic infections represent a significant health threat among recent immigrants in Chicago.Parasitology research · 2020Article
- Schistosoma mansoni in a low-prevalence area in Brazil: the importance of additional methods for the diagnosis of hard-to-detect individual carriers by low-cost immunological assays.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2013Article
- Cloning, molecular characterization of a 13-kDa antigen from Schistosoma japonicum, Sj13, a putative salivary diagnosis candidate for Schistosomiasis japonica.Parasitology research · 2009Article
- Heterogeneous antibody responses in tuberculosis.Infection and immunity · 1998Article
- Evaluation of a rapid enzyme immunoassay for diagnosis of hepatic amoebiasis.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1997Article
- Parasitic diagnosis: A journey from basic microscopy to cutting-edge technology.Tropical parasitologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review on serodiagnosis of parasitic diseases, antibody detection, antigen detection, use of monoclonal antibodies in parasitic serodiagnosis, molecular biological technology, and skin tests are discussed. The focus at the Centers for Disease Control on developing improved antigens, a truly quantitative FAST-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and the very specific immunoblot assays for antibody detection is highlighted. The last two assays are suitable for field studies. Identification of patient response in terms of immunoglobulin class or immunoglobulin G subclass isotypes or both is discussed. Immunoglobulin isotypes may asist in defining the stage of some diseases. In other instances, use of a particular anti-isotype conjugate may increase the specificity of the assay. Monoclonal antibodies have played important roles in antigen purification and identification, in competitive antibody assays with increased sensitivity and specificity, and in assays for antigen detection in serum, body fluids, or excreta. Molecular biological technology has allowed significant advances in the production of defined parasitic serodiagnostic antigens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.